Standardization  Bulletin 

of  the 

American  Mini 


' 

mm 


imp. 


0 


Proceedings  and  Papers 

of  the 

Standardization  Committees 


of  the 

American  Mining  Congress 


DENVER,  COLORADO 

November  15-20,  1920 


Published  by 

AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 
Washington  D.  C.,  1921 


Made  by 

FLEET-McGINLEY 
Baltimore,  Md. 


N&I3  f; 
!<\Z6 


CONTENTS 


Introduction  1 

Personnel  of  Standardization  Committees  2 

Opening  Session  of  Conference,  Joint  Meeting  11 

National  Standardization  Conference 21 

Coal  Mining  Section,  proceedings  30 

Metal  Mining  Section,  proceedings  00 

Papers  read  at  Standardization  Conference  71 

Index  . : 219 


563494 


INTRODUCTION 


The  following  pages  carry  a report  of  the  chairmen  of  the 
Standardization  Division  to  the  23rd  Annual  Convention  of  the 
American  Mining  Congress  held  at  Denver,  Colo.,  November 
15  to  20,  1920. 

At  this  meeting,  comprehensive  recommendations  were 
made  through  the  general  chairmen:  Col.  Warren  R.  Roberts, 
president,  Roberts  & Scheafer  Company,  Chicago,  Illinois, 
chairman  of  the  coal  mining  branch,  and  Charles  A.  Mitke, 
consulting  engineer,  Bisbee,  Arizona,  chairman  of  the  metal 
branch. 

The  purpose  of  the  publication  of  this  bulletin  is  that  the 
widest  publicity  may  be  given  to  the  activities  of  this  division. 
The  bulletin  will  be  mailed  to  a large  number  of  mining  op- 
erators, consulting  engineers,  manufacturers,  and  others  in- 
terested in  the  mining  industry. 

In  the  two  years  in  which  the  work  of  this  division  has 
been  carried  on,  unusual  interest  has  been  manifest  among  op- 
erators, engineers  and  manufacturers,  and  we  are  anxious  to 
receive  from  them  suggestions  as  to  how  the  committee  can 
improve  its  work;  suggestions  for  enlarging  the  scope  of  the 
work  of  both  the  coal  and  metal  branches.  Criticisms  of  the 
recommendations  already  made  are  solicited  and  will  be  given 
careful  consideration.  These  communications  should  be  ad- 
dressed to  Standardization  Division,  The  American  Mining 
Congress,  841  Munsey  Building,  Washington,  D.  C.  These  com- 
munications will  be  sent  to  the  chairman  of  the  sub-commit- 
tees whose  work  is  under  discussion,  and  in  this  way  we  will  be 
able  to  eliminate  matters  that  do  not  meet  with  the  approval 
of  the  industry  and  we  hope  to  receive  helpful  suggestions 
which  will  advance  the  work  of  this  division  in  the  most  in- 
telligent and  helpful  manner. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS, 

J.  F.  Callbreath,  Secretary. 


4 


STANDARDIZATION  MINING  EQUIPMENT 

Metal  and  Coal  Branches 

COAL  BRANCH 

General  Committee 

Colonel  Warren  R.  Roberts,  Chairman,  Chicago,  Illinois. 

E.  D.  Knight,  Cabin  Creek  Cons.  Coal  Co.,  Kayford,  W.  Va. 

C.  E.  Watts.  Efficiency  Engineer,  B e rw in d- White  Coal  Mining  Company, 
Windber,  Pa. 

A.  B.  Kiser,  Electrical  Engineer,  Pittsburgh  Coal  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

W.  J.  Montgomery,  Manager,  Ventilating  Dept.,  Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co., 
Columbus,  Ohio. 

K.  A.  Pauly,  Power  & Mining  Engineering  Dept.,  General  Electric  Co., 
Schenectady,  N.  Y. 

C.  A.  Cabell,  V.  P.,  Carbon  Fuel  Company,  Kanawha  National  Bank  Bldg., 

Charleston,,  W.  Va. 

Dr.  Henry  Mace  Payne,  Andrade-Eyre,  Inc.,  300  Madison  Avenue,  New 
York  City. 

Underground  Transportation 

C.  E.  Watts,  Chairman 

Charles  M.  Means,  Consulting  Engineering,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Graham  Bright,  Westinghouse  Electric  & Manufacturing  Co.,  E.  Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. 

Joseph  Bryan,  General  Electric  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

F.  C.  Coseo,  Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

D.  F.  Lepley,  General  Manager,  Connellsville  Manufacturing  & Supply 
Co.,  Connellsville,  Pa. 

C.  W.  Larson,  Engineer,  Mining  Dept.,  General  Electric  Co.,  Erie,  Pa. 

E.  A.  Watters,  General  Supt.,  Hicks’  Coal  Companies,  Leechburg,  Pa. 
J.  Milliken,  President.  Industrial  Car  Mfgrs.  Inst.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

A.  H.  Ehle,  General  Sales  Manager,  Baldwin  Locomotive  Works,  Phila- 
delphia, Pa. 

H.  K.  Porter,  Mine  Car  Department,  Hyatt  Roller  Bearing  Co.,  New  York 
City. 

Frank  S.  Barks.  President,  Lincoln  Steel  & Forge  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Fred  Norman,  Chief  Engineer.  Allegheny  River  Mining  Co.,  Kittanning,  Pa. 
T.  A.  Parker,  care  Hannibal  Car  Wheel  & Foundry  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. 

Mining  and  Loading  Equipment 
C.  A.  Cabell,  Chairman 

D.  J.  Carroll,  Chicago,  Wilmington  & Franklin  Coal  Co.,  Benton,  111. 

E.  N.  Zern,  Mining  Engineer  and  Editor  “Mining  Catalog,”  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 
Carl  Scholz.  General  Manager,  Raleigh-Wyoming  Coal  Co.,  Charleston, 

W.  Va. 

N.  D.  Levin,  Jeffrey  Manufacturing  Co.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

J.  M.  Clark,  Clark  & Krebs,  Charleston,  W.  Va. 

M.  Mitchell,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co..  St.  Louis.  Mo. 

William  Whaley,  Myers-Whaley  Co.,  Knoxville.  Tenn. 

Wm.  O.  Duntley,  Duntley-Dayton  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

E.  S.  McKinley,  625  Denham  Bldg.,  Denver,  Colo. 

Wm.  E.  Hamilton.  310  Schultz  Bldg.,  Columbus,  Ohio. 

Walter  Stevens,  Valier  Coal  Co.,  Valier,  111. 

S.  W.  Farnham.  Mining  Engineer,  Goodman  Mfg.  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

E.  K.  Bowers,  Morgan-Gardner  Electric  Co.,  68  E.  Adams  St.,  Chicago,  111. 


5 


STANDARD! ZATION  COMMITTEES 


Drainage 

E.  D.  Knight.  Chairman 

M.  C.  Benedict,  Consulting  Engineer,  Johnstown,  Pa. 

Walter  D.  Stockley,  Fairmont,  W.  Va. 

E.  F.  Austin,  Manager,  Mine  Pump  Dept.,  Dravo-Doyle  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 
Cecil  W.  Smith,  Mining  Engr.,  Nokomis  Coal  Co.,  Old  Colony  Building, 

Chicago,  111. 

F.  W.  Smith.  Mine  Drainage  Engr.,  Weinman  Pump  & Supply  Co.,  Pitts- 

burgh, Pa. 

F.  J.  Emeny.  Chief  Engr.,  The  Deming  Company,  Salem,  Ohio. 

Professor  John  W.  Hallock,  Head  of  Dept,  of  Industrial  Engineering, 

University  of  Pittsburgh,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

R.  Y.  Wert,  Mine  Drainage  Supt.,  Durham  Coal  & Iron  Co.,  Soddy,  Tenn. 
J.  H.  Edwards.  Electrical  Engr.,  Enkhorn  Piney  Coal  Mining  Co.,  Hunt- 
ington, W.  Va. 

L.  D.  Tracy.  Mining  Engineer  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Ventilation 

W.  J.  Montgomery,  Chairman 

J.  M.  Doughty,  Lehigh  & Wilkes-Barre  Coal  Co.,  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa. 
Howard  N.  Eavenson,  Mining  Engr.,  Union  Arcade  Bldg.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa, 
Martin  J.  Lide,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

G.  E.  Lyman,  Gen’l  Supt.,  Madison  Coal  Corporation,  Glen  Carbon,  111. 

E.  N.  Zern,  Mining  Engineer  and  Editor  “Mining  Catalog,”  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Outside  Coal  Handling  Equipment 

Henry  Mace  Payne,  Chairman 
G.  F.  Osler,  G.  S.  Carnegie  Coal  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

W.  A.  Bishop,  G.  S.  Pocahontas  Cons.  Collieries,  Pocahontas,  Va. 

F.  W.  Whiteside,  Chief  Engineer,  Victor  American  Fuel  Co.,  Denver,  Colo- 
Jas.  Needham,  General  Manager,  St.  Paul  Coal  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

F.  G.  Morris,  G.  S.  Coal  Mines,  Republic  Iron  & Steel  Co.,  Sayreton,  Ala. 

A.  J.  Sayres,  C.  E.  Link  Belt  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

W.  J.  Patterson,  President,  Heyl.  & Patterson  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

M.  A.  Kendall,  Chief  Engineer,  Stephens-Adamson  Mfg.  Co.,  Aurora, 
Illinois. 

Warren  R.  Roberts,  Wrigley  Building,  Chicago,  111. 

Rudolph  H.  Kudlich,  Asst,  to  Chief  Mechanical  Engr.,  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Mines,  Washington,  D.  C. 

Underground  Power  Transmission 

A.  B.  Kiser,  Chairman 

Harry  M.  Warren,  Electrical  Engineer,  D.,  L.  & W.  R:  R..  Scranton,  Pa. 
W.  A.  Chandler,  care  of  Hudson  Coal  Co.,  Scranton,  Pa. 

R.  L.  Kingsland,  General  Superintendent,  P.  & M.  Dept.,  Cons.  Coal  Co., 
Fair  mount,  W.  Va. 

Carl  Lee,  Electrical  Engineer,  Peabody  Coal  Co.,  McCormick  Building, 
Chicago,  111. 

L.  C.  Ilsley,  4800  Forbes  St.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa.  (Bureau  of  Mines). 

Power  Equipment 

K.  A.  Pauley,  Chairman 

D.  C.  McKeeham,  Box  913,  Union  Pacific  Coal  Co.,  Rock  Springs,  Wyo. 

G.  S.  Thompson,  Colorado  Fuel  & Iron  Co.,  Pueblo,  Colo. 

H.  F.  Randolph,  Cons.  Engr.,  330  Oliver  Bldg.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

M.  D.  Kirk,  Pittsburgh  Terminal  R.  R.  Coal  Co.,  Wabash  Bldg.,  Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. 

R.  W.  E.  Moore,  Westinghouse  Electric  & Manufacturing  Co.,  E.  Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. 


STANDARDIZATION  COMMITTEES 


7 


R.  L.  Kingsland,  Consolidated  Coal  Co.,  Fairmont,  W.  Va. 

W.  C.  Shunk,  Stonega  Coal  & Coke  Co.,  Big  Stone  Gap,  Va. 

J.  T.  Jennings,  Philadelphia  & Reading  Coal  & Iron  Co.,  Pottsville,  Pa. 
W.  C.  Adams,  with  Allen  & Garcia,  Chicago,  111. 

O.  P.  Hood,  Chief  Mechanical  Engineer,  Bureau  of  Mines,  Washington, 
D.  C. 

Graham  Bright,  Westinghouse  Electric  & Manufacturing  Co.,  Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. 

A.  J.  Nicht,  Allis-Chalmers  Co.,  Milwaukee,  Wis. 

Stephen  H.  Green,  Pacific  Coast  Coal  Co.,  Seattle,  Wash. 

Charles  Legrand,  Phelps  Dodge  Corp.,  Douglas,  Ariz. 

Martin  J.  Lide,  Cons.  Engr.,  Birmingham,  Ala. 

C.  D.  Woodward,  Chief  Electrical  Engineer  Anaconda  Copper  Mining  Co., 
Butte,  Mont. 

Advisory  Committee  on  Safetv  Codes 

S.  W.  Farnham,  Goodman  Manufacturing  Co.,  Chicago,  111. — Representing 

Mining  & Loading  Equipment. 

T.  A.  Parker,  Hannibal  Car  Wheel  & Foundry  Co.,  St.  Louis,  Mo. — Repre- 

senting Underground  Transportation. 

Martin  J.  Lide,  Consulting  Engineer,  Birmingham,  Ala. — Representing 
Power  Equipment. 

A.  B.  Kiser,  Pittsburgh  Coal  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. — Representing  Under- 
ground Power  Transmission. 

G.  F.  Osler,  Carnegie  Coal  Co.,  Pittsburgh,  Pa. — Representing  Outside  Coal 
Handling  Equipment. 


METAL  BRANCH 

General  Committee 

Charles  A.  Mitke,  Bisbee,  Ariz.,  Chairman 

N.  B.  Braly,  General  Manager,  North  Butte  Mining  Co.,  14  W.  Granite  St., 

Butte,  Montana. 

William  B.  Daly,  Asst.  General  Manager,  Anaconda  Copper  Company, 
Butte,  Mont. 

William  Conibear,  Inspector,  Dept,  of  Safety,  Cleveland-Cliffs  Iron  Co., 
Ishpeming,  Mich. 

H.  C.  Goodrich.  1408  Deseret  Bank  Bldg,,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 

Norman  Carmichael,  General  Manager,  Arizona  Copper  Co.,  Clifton,  Ariz. 
Lucien  Eaton,  Superintendent,  Ishpeming  District,  Cleveland-Cliffs  Iron 
Company,  Ishpeming,  Mich. 

T.  O.  McGrath,  Shattuck  Arizona  Mining  Co.,  Bisbee,  Arizona. 

Drilling  Machines  and  Drill  Steel 

N.  B.  Braly,  Chairman 

Arthur  B.  Foote,  North  Star  Mines,  Grass  Valley,  Calif. 

Arthur  Notman,  Superintendent,  Mine  Dept.,  Copper  Queen  Br.,  Phelps 
Dodge  Corpn.,  Bisbee,  Ariz. 

O.  J.  Egleston,  Manager,  U.  S.  Smelting,  Refining  & Mining  Co.,  Kennett, 

Calif. 

Arthur  Crane,  Explosive  Expert,  Hercules  Powder  Co.,  San  Francisco, 
California. 

G.  S.  Elayer,  General  Foreman,  Arizona  Commercial  Mining  Co.,  Globe, 

Arizona. 

J.  A.  Fulton,  Idaho-Maryland  Mines  Co.,  Grass  Valley,  Calif. 

L.  C.  Bayles,  Chief  Engineer,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  Phillipsburg,  N.  J. 

H.  Seamon,  Efficiency  Engineer,  United  Verde  Copper  Co..  Jerome,  Ariz. 
Ocha  Potter,  Superintendent,  Superior  Division,  Calumet  and  Hecla 

Mining  Co.,  Houghton,  Mich. 

R.  T.  Murrill,  Inspiration  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Inspiration,  Ariz. 


8 


STANDA RDIZATION  COM M ITTEES 


George  H.  Gilman,  125  Prescott  Street,  East  Boston,  Mass. 

Charles  Lees,  Superintendent,  Iron  Cap  Copper  Co.,  Copper  Hill,  Ariz. 

Charles  A.  Smith,  Mine  Superintendent,  Ray  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Ray,  Ariz. 

Roy  Marks,  Stope  Engineer,  Box  1676,  United  Verde  Exten.  Mining  Co., 
Jerome,  Ariz. 

Earl  Hastings,  Foreman,  Clay  Mine,  Arizona  Copper  Co.,  Ltd.,  Morenci, 
Arizona. 

Frank  Ayer,  Mine  Superintendent,  Moctezuma  Copper  Co.,  Pilares  De 
Nacozari,  Sonora,  Mexico. 

W.  G.  Scott,  Superintendent,  Coronado  Mines,  Arizona  Copper  Co.,  Ltd., 
Metcalf,  Ariz. 

Thos.  C.  Baker,  Asst.  General  Manager,  The  Mexican  Corporation,  Edificio, 
La  Mutua,  Mexico  City,  Mexico. 

Charles  Officer,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

A.  S.  Uhler,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  New  York  City. 

George  D.  Shaw,  Efficiency  Engineer,  Denver  Rock  Drill  Manufacturing 
Co.,  Denver,  Colo. 

H.  T.  Walsh.  V.  P.,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

R.  A.  Scott.  S.  M.,  Denver  Rock  Drill  Mfg.  Co.,  Denver,  Colo. 

Bruce  Yates,  Homestake  Mining  Co.,  Lead,  S.  D. 

Inner  Committee 
Drilling  Machines  and  Drill  Steel 

Frank  Ayer,  Superintendent,  Moctezuma  Copper  Co.,  Nacozari,  Sonora, 
Mexico. 

H.  Seamon,  Drill  Efficiency  Engineer,  United  Verde  Copper  Co.,  Jerome. 
Arizona. 

Charles  A.  Smith,  Superintendent,  Ray  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Ray,  Ariz. 

Arthur  Notman,  Superintendent,  Copper  Queen  Br.  Phelps  Dodge  Corp., 
Bisbee,  Ariz. 

George  Gilman,  125  Prescott  St.,  East  Boston,  Mass. 

H.  T.  Walsh,  Vice-President  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Chicago,  111. 

George  A.  Shaw,  Efficiency  Engineer,  Denver  Rock  Drill  Manufacturing 
Co.,  Denver,  Colo. 

L.  C.  Bayles,  Chief  Engineer,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  Phillipsburg,  N.  J. 

Underground  Transportation 

William  B.  Daly,  Chairman 

George  H.  Booth.  Mechanical  Engineer,  Inspiration  Cons.  Copper  Co., 
Inspiration,  Ariz. 

Andover  Syverson,  Chief  Engineer,  United  Verde  Exten.  Mining  Co., 
Jerome,  Ariz. 

E.  M.  Morris,  Asst.  Supt.  of  Mines,  Anaconda  Copper  Mining  Co.,  of  Butte, 
Montana. 

R.  R.  Boyd,  Asst.  Superintendent,  Mine  Dept.  Copper  Queen  Branch, 
Phelps  Dodge  Corp.,  Bisbee,  Ariz. 

T.  K.  Scott.  Chief  Engineer,  Box  100,  Miami  Copper  Co.,  Miami,  Ariz. 

H.  T.  Hamilton,  Manager,  Moctezuma  Copper  Co.,  Nacozari,  Son.,  Mexico. 

R.  E.  Howe,  Asst.  General  Manager,  Cananea  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Cananea, 
Sonora,  Mexico. 

D.  S.  Calland,  Managing  Director,  Compania  de  Real  del  Monte  de 
Pachuca,  Pachuca,  Hildago,  Mexico. 

Fire  Fighting  Equipment 

William  Conibear,  Chairman 

J.  T.  Young,  Safety  Inspector,  Arizona  Copper  Company,  Morenci,  Ariz. 

Orr  Woodburn,  Safety  First  Director,  Globe-Miami  District,  Globe,  Ariz. 


STANDARDIZATION  COMMITTEES 


9 


A.  A.  Krogdahl,  Safety  Engineer,  Oliver  Iron  Mining  Co.,  Virginia,  Minn. 
Guy  J.  Johnson,  Safety  Engineer,  Homestake  Mining  Company,  Lead, 
South  Dakota. 

H.  J.  Rahilly,  Superintendent,  Mine  Fire  & Hydraulic  Filling  Dept., 
Anaconda  Copper  Mining  Company,  Butte,  Mont. 

Steam  Shovel  Equipment 

H.  C.  Goodrich,  Chairman 

Robert  E.  Tally,  General  Superintendent,  United  Verde  Copper  Company, 
Clarkdale,  Ariz. 

G.  W.  Barnhart,  Manager,  San  Francisco  Branch,  Marion  Steam  Shovel 

Co.,  San  Francisco,  Calif. 

C.  B.  Lakenan,  General  Manager,  Nevada  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  McGill,  Nev. 

H.  G.  S.  Anderson,  Mining  & Metallurgical  Engineer,  Hurley,  N.  Mex. 

Mine  Ventilation 

Charles  A.  Mitke,  Chairman  (Temporary) 

A.  C.  Stoddard,  Chief  Engineer,  Inspiration  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Box  15, 
Inspiration,  Ariz. 

D.  Harrington,  care  Bureau  of  Mines,  Golden,  Colo. 

Norman  G.  Hardy,  Chief  Mechanical  Engineer,  Smelter  Dept.,  Arizona 
Copper  Co.,  Clifton,  Ariz. 

W.  A.  Rowe,  Chief  Engineer,  American  Blower  Co.,  Detroit,  Mich. 

E.  B.  Williams,  Manager,  Mine  Fan  Dept.,  B.  F.  Sturtevant  Company, 

Hyde  Park,  Boston,  Mass. 

Robert  N.  Bell,  Boise,  Idaho. 

F.  L.  Stone,  care  General  Electric  Co.,  Schenectady,  N.  Y. 

C.  E.  Legrand,  Consulting  Engineer,  Phelps  Dodge  Corp.,  Douglas,  Ariz. 

O.  K.  Dyer,  Buffalo  Forge  Company,  Buffalo*  N.  Y. 

Don  M.  Rait.  Asst.  Superintendent  of  Mines,  Calumet  and  Arizona  Min- 
ing Co.,  Warren,  Ariz. 

A.  S.  Richardson,  Chief  of  Ventilating  Department,  Anaconda  Copper 
Mining  Co.,  Drawer  1375,  Butte,  Mont. 

Mechanical  Loading  Underground 

Lucien  Eaton,  Chairman 

H.  E.  Billington,  Manager  of  Sales,  The  Thew  Shovel  Co.,  Lorain,  Ohio. 
J.  H.  Hensley,  Mine  Superintendent,  Miami  Copper  Company,  Miami, 
Arizona. 

Albin  F.  Victor,  Manager  of  Sales,  Lake  Superior  Loader  Co.,  Duluth. 
Minn. 

H.  DeWitt  Smith,  Superintendent  of  Mines,  United  Verde  Copper  Co., 
Jerome,  Ariz. 

William  Whaley,  General  Manager,  Myers- Whaley  Co.,  Knoxville.  Tenn. 
R.  W.  Macfarlane,  Mining  Dept.,  Longfellow  Div.,  Arizona  Copper  Co., 
Morenci,  Ariz. 


Mine  Timber 

Norman  Carmichael,  Chairman 

W.  G.  McBride,  General  Manager,  Old  Dominion  Co.,  Globe,  Ariz. 

Ira  B.  Joralemon,  Asst.  General  Manager,  Calumet  & Arizona  Mining  Co., 
Warren,  Ariz. 

Felix  McDonald,  Mines  Superintendent,  Inspiration  Cons.  Copper  Co., 
Inspiration,  Ariz. 

John  Kiddie,  Division  Superintendent,  Arizona  Copper  Company,  Morenci, 
Arizona. 


30 


STANDARDIZATION  COMMITTEES 


W.  S.  Boyd,  Manager  Ray  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Ray,  Ariz. 

T.  Evans,  General  Supt.,  Cananea  Cons.  Copper  Co.,  Cananea,  Sonora, 
Mexico. 

G.  W.  Nicholson,  General  Supt.,  United  Verde  Exten.  Mining  Co.,  Jerome, 
Ariz. 


Mine  Accounting 

T.  O.  McGrath,  Chairman 

L.  S.  Cates,  General  Mgr.,  Utah  Copper  Co.,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 

J.  C.  Dick,  Salt  Lake  City,  Utah. 

H.  H.  Miller,  General  Auditor,  Hercules  Mining  Co.,  Wallace,  Idaho. 

II.  L.  Norton.  Phelps-Dodge  Corporation.  Douglas,  Arizona. 

Harry  Vivian,  Chief  Engineer  Calumet  and  Hecla  Mining  Co.,  Calumet, 
Michigan. 


k 


JOINT  MEETING  OF  COAL  AND  METAL  SECTIONS  STAND- 
ARDIZATION COMMITTEE 

The  American  Mining  Congress 

MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  15,  1920,  11  A.  M. 

Carl  Scholz,  Acting  Chairman  of  the  Coal  Section;  Chas.  A.  Mitke, 
Chairman  of  the  Metal  Section,  presided. 

The  following  were  in  attendance,  including  those  who  registered  after 
the  session  started: 

Barnhardt,  G.  W.,  Marion  Steam  Shovel  Mfg.  Co.,  San  Francisco, 
California. 

Bayles,  L.  C.,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  Phillipsburg,  N.  J. 

Boom,  B.  P.,  Westinghouse  Electric  Mfg.  Co. 

Brewster,  T.  T.,  vice-president  Mt.  Olive  & Stanton  Coal  Company, 
St.  Louis,  Missouri. 

Bright,  G.,  Westinghouse  Electric  Mfg.  Co.,  Denver,  Colorado. 
Broden,  Charles  E.,  Hazard  Mfg.  Co.,  Wilkes-Barre,  Pa. 

Burgess,  George  K.,  with  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Standards  and  also  Ameri- 
can Engineering  Standardization  Committee. 

Carroll,  Frank,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  Los  Angeles,  California. 
Cottrell,  J.  G.,  Director  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines,  Washington,  D.  C. 
Curry,  J.  E.,  Arizona  Chapter  of  American  Mining  Congress. 
Doubleday,  F.  E.,  Doubleday  Coal  Co.,  Fort  Scott,  Kansas. 

Ebe,  J.  A.,  consulting  mining  engineer,  LaSalle,  111.;  and  manager  of 
Mining  Department  of  Illinois  Zinc  Co.,  Peru,  Illinois. 

Golden,  James,  Mining  Inspector,  Fourth  District,  W.  Va. 
Grensfelder,  N.  S.,  Hercules  Powder  Co.,  Wilmington,  Del. 

Hall,  R.  D.,  Goal  Age,  New  York  City. 

Jowett,  J.  H.,  Ingersoll-Rand  Company,  New  York. 

Kasemen,  G.  A.,  president  Albuquerque  & Cerrillos  Coal  Co.,  Albu- 
querque, New  Mexico. 

Kiddie,  John,  superintendent  Mining  Department,  Arizona  Copper 
Co.,  Clifton,  Arizona. 

Kipp,  Ernest  B.,  local  representative  Hazard  Mfg.- Co.,  Wilkes-Barre, 
Pennsylvania. 

Kiser,  A.  V.,  superintendent  Electric  Equipment  Coal  Co.,  Pittsburgh, 
Pennsylvania. 

Lampinen,  E.  O.,  Kavehills  Coal  Co.,  South  Dakota. 


11 


12 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


Larson,  C.  W.,  engineer  Mining  Dept.,  General  Electric  Co.,  Erie,  Pa. 
Longyear,  Robert  D.,  E.  Y.  Longyear  Co.,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 

Lunt,  H.  F.,  State  Commissioner  of  Mines,  Denver,  Colo. 

Marks,  J.  B.,  Colorado  Fuel  & Iron  Co.,  Denver,  Colo. 

Milliken,  James,  president  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers  Institute, 
Pittsburgh,  Pa. 

Mitke,  Charles  M.,  consulting  engineer,  Bisbee,  Arizona. 

Morrison,  A.  Cressy,  National  Acetylene  Assn.,  New  York  City. 
Mott,  Chester,  district  manager,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Denver, 
Colorado. 

McKeehan,  D.  C.,  Union  Pacific  Coal  Co!,  Rock  Springs,  Wyo. 
McKinley,  C.  S.,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Needham,  John,  Mining  Department  of  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  & St. 

Paul  R.  R.,  63  E.  Adams  St.,  Chicago,  111. 

Norman,  Fred.,  The  Alleghany  River  Mining  Co.,  Kittanning,  Pa. 
Notman,  Arthur,  superintendent,  Mining  Department,  Phelps  Dodge 
Corporation,  Bisbee,  Arizona. 

Officer,  C.  H.,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Chicago,  Illinois. 

Parker,  Richard  A.,  representing  the  Mining  and  Metallurgical 
Society  of  America,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Rait,  E.  M.,  Arizona  Mining  Co.,  Clifton,  Arizona. 

Richards,  J.  W.,  assessor,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Richards,  P.  J.,  coal  analyst,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Risdon,  W.  W.,  State  Mine  Inspector,  Gallup,  New  Mexico. 

Robinson,  Harry  W.,  attorney-at-law,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Robinson,  — , General  Electric  Co.,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Rowe,  W.  A.,  American  Blower  Co.,  Detroit,  Michigan. 

Scholz,  Carl,  Jr.,  Raleigh-Wyoming  Coal  Company,  Charleston,  West 
Virginia. 

Scott,  R.  A.,  Denver  Rock  Drill  Mfg.  Co.,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Smith,  C.  D.,  Goodman  Mfg.  Co.,  Chicago,  Illinois. 

Smith,  Roy  F.,  Empire  Zinc  Co.,  Denver,  Colorado. 

Thompson,  G.  S.,  Fuel  Department,  Colorado  Fuel  & Iron  Co.,  Pueblo, 
Colorado. 

Uhler,  A.  S.,  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  New  York. 

Victor,  A.  F.,  Lake  Superior  Motor  Co.,  Duluth,  Minnesota. 

Walsh,  H.  G.,  Sullivan  Machinery  Co.,  Chicago,  Illinois. 

Watts,  C.  E.,  Berwind  Coal  Co.,  Windber,  Pennsylvania. 

Wilson,  H.  M.,  general  manager  The  Associated  Companies,  Hart- 
ford, Connecticut. 


CHAIRMAN  MITKE:  Mr.  Scholz  and  I have  decided  that  instead  of 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


13 


taking  up  technical  matters  this  morning,  we  will  confine  our  discussion 
to  subjects  of  general  interest  to  the  Coal  and  Metal  Sections. 

The  method  of  procedure  adopted  by  the  Metal  Section  of  the  Stand- 
ardization Committee,  is  as  follows: 

First,  a general  committee,  consisting  of  a chairman  and  six  members 
was  appointed,  each  of  the  seven  being  in  turn,  chairmen  of  the  Sub- 
committees. Seven  Sub-Committees,  were  then  appointed,  the  personnel 
representing  practically  every  mining  State  in  the  Union. 

Meetings  not  Suitable;  Work  by  Correspondence 

Owing  to  the  fact  that  our  Committee  members  live  so  far  apart,  fre- 
quent meetings  were  out  of  the  question,  and  all  the  work  must  therefore 
be  carried  on  by  correspondence.  In  order  to  provide  a working  bas^ 
questionnaires  have  been  prepared  by  the  various  chairmen  and  sent  not 
only  to  Committee  members,  but  to  operators  in  district  not  represented 
by  them.  Upon  receipt  of  these  questionnaires,  properly  filled  out,  the 
information  thus  obtained  is  tabulated  and  then  sent  out  to  the  Com- 
mittee members  for  their  study,  comments,  and  suggestions.  By  this- 
means  it  is  hoped  that  valuable  deductions  may  finally  be  evolved,  which 
will  prove  of  material  benefit  to  the  mining  industry.  This  is  the  plan  of 
the  Metal  Section.  Mr.  Scholz,  who,  in  Colonel  Roberts’  absence  in 
Illinois,  is  acting  chairman  of  the  Coal  Section,  will  give  us  an  outline 
of  the  manner  in  which  that  Section  is  functioning. 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  Colonel  Roberts  has  been  in  charge  of  this  matter  and 
will  make  a report  later  on,  showing  how  effective  his  work  has  been. 
Unfortunately,  I have  not  had  time  to  give  the  subject  the  full  consider- 
ation it  deserves.  I am  sure,  however,  that  the  Committee  is  going  to  do 
a lot  of  good. 

The  Committee  of  which  I am  chairman — on  Mining  and  Loading  Ma- 
chinery— is  an  important  one.  We  feel  that  with  the  high  cost  of  labor, 
mechanical  mining  and  loading  is  more  in  demand  than  ever.  Our  idea 
has  been  to  standardize  certain  general  equipment  on  which  we  could 
agree.  We  found  that  there  were  more  differences  among  the  manufac- 
turers than  we  felt  should  exist.  Of  course,  we  realized  that  every  manu- 
facturer has  certain  professional  secrets  which  he  keeps  himself,  which 
we  should  approach  with  more  or  less  consideration  and  care;  but  I do 
feel  that  we  ought  to  get  closer  together  than  we  have,  in  order  to  sim-. 
plify  the  question  of  repairs  and  maintenance  and  other  matters,  although 
equipment  matters  are  such  that  we  may  not  be  able  to  do  much  with 
them  at  this  time.  Of  course,  we  do  not  care  to  standardize  such  things 
as  miners’  houses,  because  it  requires  a diversity;  but  as  far  as  equip- 
ment is  concerned,  when  we  sample  the  parts  in  the  interest  of  the 
manufacturers,  it  will  enable  us  to  test  vnachinery  that  otherwise  would 
be  barred,  because  every  company  operating  far  from  a manufacturer 
knows  what  a tremendous  amount  of  money  it  requires  to  secure  a stock 
of  repair  parts.  The  detailed  reports  I understand  will  be  read  at  some 
later  meeting.  The  present  object  is  to  get  acquainted  and  see  what  we 
could  agree  upon  as  to  a plan  of  action. 


14 


EPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


MR.  MITKE:  Has  anyone  any  suggestions  about  the  general  plan  of 
investigation  that  we  should  adopt,  or  anything  whatever  to  offer? 

MR.  G.  BRIGHT:  I should  like  to  bring  up  something  in  connection 
with  the  Committees  on  Coal  Mining  and  Metal  Mining.  In  many  in- 
stances the  work  is  entirely  different.  Some  of  the  Committees  on  the 
latter  have  subjects  to  consider  which  do  not  concern  coal  at  all,  and  I 

Merging  of  Committees  on  Parallel  Subjects 

understand  there  are  other  Committees  that  are  almost  parallel.  I think 
that  it  would  be  somewhat  advantageous  for  those  Committees — for  in- 
stance, Underground  Transportation — to  work  together;  otherwise,  if 
they  work  entirely  separate,  it  looks  as  if  they  may  come  in  with  recom- 
mendations that  are  rather  far  apart,  and  it  would  be  rather  difficult  for 
the  American  Mining  Congress  to  issue  these  recommendations  to  the 
public  when  they  do  not  agree  at  all;  while  if  these  Committees  worked 
together,  they  could  no  doubt  come  to  some  definite,  agreement  on  which 
the  same  standards  could  be  reached.  Conditions  are  different  in  coal 
and  metal  mining;  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  some  conditions  on  which 
the  same  standards  could  be  reached. 

MR.  MITKE:  Your  idea  is  that  transportation  is  transportation  the 
world  over? 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  So  is  drainage. 

MR.  BRIGHT:  Of  course,  ventilation  and  some  problems  like  that  are 
similar. 

MR.  A.  V.  KISER:  Underground  equipment  and  underground  trans- 
mission are  parallel,  and  we  should  not  bring  in  a recommendation  which 
we  think  is  not  concurred  in  by  the  Metal  Mining  Committee. 

MR.  MITKE:  The  Sub-Committee  on  Coal  Transportation  and  the 
Sub-Committee  on  Metal  Transportation  might  get  together,  and  compare 
and  correlate  their  reports. 

MR.  KISER:  Yes,  after  their  Committees  agree  on  the  reports. 

MR.  BRIGHT:  When  it  comes  to  the  final  meeting,  at  the  end  of  next 
year  [1921],  we  are  hoping  that  we  will  have  something  that  is  really 
worth-while,  but  in  the  meantime  they  can  exchange  their  reports,  long 
before  that,  and  have  them  pretty  well  discussed. 

MR.  MITKE:  That  is  a good  suggestion.  In  fact,  I understand  some 
of  the  reports  of  the  Committees  of  the  Coal  Mining  division  are  ready 
for  publication  and  distribution  now. 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  I wish  to  hand  in  the  report  of  the  Coal  Mining  branch 
of  this  Committee  to  be  read,  if  the  time  affords. 

MR.  MITKE:  I believe  it  wiuld  be  better  to  defer  that  until  the  meet- 
ing of  the  Coal  Section  tomorrow  morning. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


15 


Mr.  Notman  has  some  suggestions  about  the  progress  in  carrying  out 
the  investigation  which  might  be  helpful  in  facilitating  matters  more  or 
less,  especially  in  arranging  details. 

MR.  ARTHUR  NOTMAN:  I have  given  the  matter  quite  a little 
thought,  but  I do  not  know  whether  my  ideas  will  agree  with  the  other 
members  of  our  Sub-Committee  or  not.  I am  on  the  Sub-Committee  on 
drilling  machines  and  steel,  and  I received  with  interest  the  question- 
naire from  our  chairman,  Mr.  Braly,  who,  unfortunately  is  not  here,  but 
I was  unable  to  complete  it  before  leaving  Bisbee.  We  have  been  engaged 
in  an  investigation  on  the  subject  during  the  past  six  months,  and  I have 
a report  which  I hope  to  be  able  to  present  to  Mr.  Braly  in  person,  but 
with  Mr.  Mitke’s  permission  I will  present  it  at  the  meeting  of  the  Metal 
Section  tomorrow  afternoon.  It  occurred  to  me,  that  in  order  to  expedite 
matters,  it  might  be  advisable  to  have  an  inner  circle,  covering  this  Sub- 
committee— which  I understand  has  a membership  of  about  forty — and 
discuss  the  question  in  detail,  and  have  them,  with  Mr.  Braly,  go  over 
the  questionnaires,  and  any  detailed  reports  that  may  be  presented  here, 
and  summarize — as  our  Chairman  has  suggested — all  that  information. 

Question  of  Procedure 

Then  there  could  be  at  least  one  meeting  of  that  smaller  group,  prior  to 
the  next  annual  convention  of  the  Mining  Congress,  early  enough  so  that 
their  resolution  or  report  to  their  chairman  could  be  referred  back  to  all 
the  members  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  drilling  machines  and  steel  for 
their  criticism  and  suggestions,  in  advance  of  the  Mining  Congress  meet- 
ing. As  Mr.  Mitke  has  pointed  out,  it  is  extremely  difficult  for  the  mining 
industry,  particularly  because  we  are  so  scattered,  to  get  any  representa- 
tive number  together  and  discuss  a question  like  standardization,  which 
is  almost  entirely  a matter  of  detail,  and  in  order  to  accomplish  some- 
thing, we  must  have  a few  men  who  can  get  together. 

I have  three  copies  of  my  report  which  I would  like  to  give  to  repre- 
sentatives of  drill  manufacturers  in  advance  of  the  meeting  tomorrow, 
so  that  they  might  have  an  opportunity  to  digest  it  and  discuss  it  at  that 
time. 

MR.  MITKE:  I shall  now  read  a report  sent  by  Colonel  Roberts,  con- 
cerning the  meeting  of  the  General  Correlating  Committee  of  the  Ameri- 
can Engineering  Standards  Committee,  held  in  New  York  recently: 

The  report  states  that,  in  accordance  with  a call  sent  out  by  Mr.  P.  G. 
Agnew,  secretary,  a conference  -was  held  in  New  York  on  November  11, 
1920,  with  representatives  present  from  each  of  the  five  national  organi- 
zations and  societies  to  whom  the  call  was  sent,  namely,  the  (1)  American 
Institute  of  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Engineers;  (2)  American  Mining 
Congress;  (3)  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Society  of  America;  (4)  National 
Safety  Council;  and  (5)  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines. 

These  had  previously  named  the  following  as  their  representatives  on 
this  general  correlating  committee: 


1G 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


(1)  Howard  N.  Evanson  and  Graham  Bright;  (2)  Charles  A.  Mitke  and 
Col.  Warren  R.  Roberts;  (3)  B.  B.  Gottsberger  and  E.  S.  Berry;  (4)  J.  S. 
Williams  and  F.  P.  Sinn;  and  (5)  O.  P.  Hood.  The  following  were  present 
in  person  or  by  alternatives:  (1)  P.  E.  Barbour;  (2)  Colonel  Roberts; 
(3)  B.  B.  Gottsberger;  (4)  F.  B.  Sinn;  and  (5)  O.  P.  Hood. 

The  Minutes  of  the  first  conference  of  this  general  correlating  com- 
mittee, as  hurriedly  prepared  by  the  secretary  of  the  American  Engineer- 
ing Standards  Committee,  are  hereto  attached.  These  minutes  represent 
»uDstantially  the  work  accomplished  and  the  agreements  reached  at  this 
first  conference.  They  are  signed  by  Colonel  Roberts. 

Report  of  Correlating  Committee 

“The  minutes  of  this  conference  should  state  that  Mr.  A.  A.  Stevenson, 
chairman  of  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  and  Mr. 
P.  G.  Agnew,  secretary  of  this  Committee,  were  unanimously  selected  as 
temporary  chairman  and  temporary  secretary  for  this  first  conference  of 
this  General  Correlating  Committee,  it  being  the  sense  of  the  representa- 
tives present  that  the  permanent  chairman  and  secretary  should  not  be 
selected  until  the  next  conference  of  the  committee,  when  it  was  hoped  a 
fuller  representation  of  the  societies  would  be  present. 

It  should  be  noted  that  the  representatives  present  for  some  of  the 
societies  did  not  feel  disposed  at  this  first  conference  to  bind  their  socie- 
ties to  any  definite  program,  and  wished  to  refer  the  matters  back  to 
their  society  for  formal  approval.  However,  it  was  their  personal  judg- 
ment that  their  program  of  correlation,  as  tentatively  agreed  upon  at  this 
conference,  would  be  approved  by  their  societies. 

Colonel  Roberts,  representing  the  American  Mining  Congress,  advised 
that  it  was  very  important  that  some  such  general  program  for  correlating 
the  standardization  work,  which  was  being  carried  on  by  the  various 
organizations  and  societies  named  above,  or  which  they  might  wish  to 
enter  upon,  should  be  agreed  to  at  this  conference,  for  the  reason  that 
the  American  Mining  Congress  would  expect  its  representative  at  this 
conference  to  report  at  the  first  National  Standardization  Conference,  to 
be  held  in  Denver,  November  15  to  19,  inclusive,  whether  any  such  pro- 
gram had  been  agreed  upon,  and  if  so,  the  substance  of  such  program.  It 
was  for  this  reason  that  the  temporary  chairman  of  the  meeting  urged 
upon  the  representatives  of  the  various  societies  that  they  reach,  at  least, 
some  tentative  agreement,  which  was  done  as  outlined  in  the  minutes  of 
the  meeting  above  referred  to. 

Your  representative  at  this  conference  advised  the  representatives  of 
th  other  societies  present,  that  the  general  correlating  program,  as  ten- 
tatively agreed  upon,  met  with  his  personal  approval,  and  that  he  would 
so  report  at  the  first  National  Standardization  Conference  of  the  American 
Mining  Congress  and  recommend  the  acceptance  of  such  program  by  our 
Congress. 

All  Organizations  to  Outline  Their  Activities 

As  indicated  in  the  first  paragraph  on  the  last  page  of  the  minutes  of 
this  conference,  the  representative  of  each  organization  present  agreed  to 
prepare  a brief  outline  of  the  activities  of  this  organization  on  standard- 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


17 


ization  work  as  applied  to  the  mining  industry.  Such  presentation  of  the 
work  of  our  Mining  Congress  on  standardization  can  better  be  prepared 
at  a date  after  our  National  Convention. 

The  conference  adjourned  subject  to  call  of  the  chairman  or  secretary 
of  the  American  Engineering  Standard  Committee.  It  was,  however,  ten- 
tatively agreed  to  by  the  representatives  present  that  the  next  conference 
should  be  held  in  New  York  City  about  the  middle  of  December  (1920), 
at  some  date  to  be  mutually  agreed  upon  by  the  representatives  of  the 
various  organizations.  At  this  next  conference  it  was  expected  to  com- 
plete the  organization  of  this  general  correlating  committee  by  selecting 
a permanent  chairman  and  secretary;  and  it  is  also  hoped  that  at  this 
next  conference  the  representatives  of  the  various  organizations  will  have 
secured  the  approval  of  their  respective  societies  to  the  tentative  pro- 
gram as  outlined  above  in  this  report,  which  will  enable  this  committee 
then  to  prepare  a definite  program  for  correlating  the  standardization 
work  of  all  these  organizations  and  societies.” 

MR.  GEORGE  K.  BURGESS:  Speaking  as  a member  of  the  American 
Engineering  Standards  Committee,  I might  say  that  I was  sorry  not  to 
be  able  to  be  at  that  meeting  of  November  11,  but  in  general  I think 
that  the  long  view  ahead,  as  mentioned  in  Col.  Roberts’  report,  was  of  great 
importance.  The  program  as  outlined  by  your  chairman  earlier  in  the 
meeting  is  all  right — there  is  no  question  about  standardization  being 
good — but  the  function  of  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee 
is  not  to  make  standards;  the  function  of  that  committee  is  to  supervise 
the  methods,  the  fundamental  idea  being  that  all  interests  concerned  in 
any  given  standardization  project  or  industry,  will  be  representative. 

Interlocking  of  Organizations 

That,  however,  does  not  prevent — on  the  contrary  it  leads  to  the  encour- 
agement of  active  work  on  any  particular  unit  representing  either  a large 
portion  or  any  portion  of  the  industry  in  question.  In  the  mining  industry 
there  are  several  bodies  interested  directly — some  of  them  indirectly, — 
in  standardization  methods.  Therefore,  before  a standard  is  promulgated 
as  an  American  standard, — that  is,  representing  decisions  which  are  sub- 
scribed to  by  the  whole  country — some  process  as  indicated  in  Col. 
Roberts’  report  of  the  November  11  meeting,  is  inevitable,  namely,  that 
we  must  not  only  get  together  in  this  organization,  but  you  are  to  join 
with  other  similar  organizations  working  on  the  same  problem.  Therefore, 
the  proper  way  to  organize  this  standardization  work  is  to  go  ahead  with 
your  own  committees,  at  the  same  time  tying  up  with  other  organizations. 
I think  if  that  policy  is  adopted,  it  will  lead  to  greater,  more  definite,  and 
efficient  progress  than  by  any  other  procedure. 

MR.  N.  S.  GRENSFELDER:  Has  it  been  decided  definitely  about  that 
meeting  in  New  York  mentioned  in  Col.  Roberts’  report? 

MR.  MITKE:  It  is  to  be  some  time  in  December,  1920. 


18 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


MR.  A.  C.  MORRISON:  Is  iLcre  any  objection  to  reading  the  tentative 
agreement,  or  is  that  to  be  postponed  until  some  other  meeting?  Mr. 
Roberts  refers  constantly  to  a tentative  agreement  which  had  been 
reached,  and  he  recommends  its  adoption,  but  the  agreement  is  not  before 
the  meeting. 

MR.  MITKE:  I have  not  read  it  yet  as  it  has  just  been  received,  but 
will  now  do  so.  It  is  signed  by  the  secretary,  P.  G.  Agnew. 

“The  meeting  was  called  to  order  by  Mr.  A.  A.  Stevenson,  Chairman  of 
the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  at  2:30  p.  m. 

Those  present  were  Percy  E.  Barbour,  representing  the  American  Insti- 
tute of  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Engineers;  Warren  R.  Roberts,  the 
Mining  and  Metallurgical  Society  of  America;  F.  P.  Sinn,  the  National 
Safety  Council;  O.  P.  Hood,  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines;  A.  A.  Stevenson, 
chairman,  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  and  P.  G.  Agnew, 
secretary,  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee. 

It  was  announced  that  the  following  gentlemen  who  have  been  desig- 
nated as  members  of  the  Committee,  representing  their  respective  organ- 
izations, were  unable  to  meet  with  the  conference.  They  included  Messrs. 
Evanson,  Bright,  Mitke,  Berry,  and  Holbrook,  and  others. 

In  view  of  the  absence  of  several  members  of  the  Committee,  it  was 
decided  not  to  proceed  with  the  election  of  a permanent  chairman,  and 
upon  motion  by  Col.  Roberts  it  was  voted  that  Mr.  Stevenson  be  requested 
to  act  as  temporary  chairman.  Mr.  Stevenson  consented  to  serve.  The 
Secretary  of  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee  was  re- 
quested to  serve  as  secretary  of  the  meeting. 

The  Mining  Congress  and  Standardization 

Methods  of  co-operation.  Col.  Roberts  briefly  outlined  the  work  of  the 
American  Mining  Congress.  The  Congress  was  to  hold  its  annual  Con- 
vention in  Denver  the  following  week,  and  one  of  the  principal  features 
of  the  Convention  would  be  a general  conference  on  standardization  in 
the  mining  industry.  It  was  very  desirable  that  some  agreement  be 
reached  as  to  the  general  method  of  co-operation,  and  to  be  followed  in 
correlating  the  standardization  work  of  the  various  organizations,  in  order 
that  the  work  might  be  finally  approved  by  the  American  Engineering 
Standards  Committee.  The  Standardization  Conference  in  Denver  should 
be  apprised  of  the  methods  to  be  followed. 

Mr.  Hood  briefly  outlined  some  of  the  standardization  activities  of  the 
Bureau  of  Mines,  and  pointed  out,  by  use  of  illustrations,  the  importance 
of  clearly  defining  the  relation  of  each  of  the  co-operating  organizations 
to  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee. 

In  the  frank  and  rather  full  discussion  which  followed,  it  was  recognized 
that  the  main  function  of  the  present  Committee  would  be  to  work  out 
the  methods  of  correlating  the  standardization  activities  of  the  various 
organizations  concerned,  in  order  that  specific  parts  of  the  work  should 
receive  final  approval  of  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee 
after  clearing  through  the  mechanism  of  co-operation  to  be  agreed  upon. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


ID 


It  would  be  first  of  all  necessary  to  work  out  a general  policy  and  plan 
to  be  followed  in  the  work.  The  Committee  would  then  have  to  apply 
this  plan  to  specific  projects,  acting  as  technical  advisor  to  the  American 

General  Plan 

Engineering  Standards  Committee  in  the  mining  field.  It  was  recognized 
that  in  the  application  of  the  general  plan  there  would  be  involved  such 
work  as: 

(1)  Delimiting  specific  projects  which  might  be  most  advantageously 
handled  as  units. 

(2)  Recommending  the  order  in  which  the  various  projects  should  be 
taken  up  in  view  of  the  needs  of  the  industry. 

(3)  Make  recommendations  as  to  what  bodies  should  act  as  sponsors 
for  specific  projects,  and  as  to  what  bodies  should  be  represented  upon 
sectional  committees. 

It  was  agreed  that  the  members  should  recommend  to  their  respective 
organizations  the  following  as  a general  plan  for  co-ordinating  the  present 
standardization  activities  of  the  different  bodies  and  placing  the  work 
under  the  rules  of  procedure  of  the  American  Engineering  Standards 
Committee. 

(a)  If  an  organization  has  a standardization  project  practically  com- 
pleted or  well  under  way,  the  organization  should  be  recommended  as 
sponsor  (either  as  sole  sponsor  or  as  joint  sponsor,  with  another  organ- 
ization, according  to  circumstances). 

(b)  If  the  organization  has  a committee  organized  and  working  on  the 
subject,  the  make-up  and  representative  character  of  the  committee  in 
sponsor  (either  as  sole  sponsor  or  as  joint  sponsor,  with  another  organ- 
adequately  representative,  it  could  become  the  sectional  committee. 

If  found  not  to  be  completely  representative,  the  committee  in  question, 
or  a portion  of  it,  could  serve  as  the  nucleus  of  a more  broadly  represen- 
tative sectional  committee. 

It  was  felt  that  this  sectional  plan  would  fit  in  with  the  procedure 
established  by  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  and  would 
not  interfere  with  the  progress  of  the  work  now  in  hand. 

Relation  to  Safety  Code  Program:  The  relation  of  the  work  to  that  of 
the  National  Safety  Code  Committee  was  briefly  discussed.  It  was  voted 
that  the  Secretary  be  instructed  to  write  to  the  National  Safety  Code 
Committee,  informing  them  of  the  organization  of  the  General  Correlating 
Committee,  and  apprising  them  of  the  desire  of  the  General  Committee 
to  co-operate  with  the  National  Safety  Code  Committee. 

The  Safety  Code  Program 

It  was  further  voted  that  the  Secretary  be  instructed  to  prepare  a brief 
outline  of  the  history  of  the  Safety  Code  Program,  and  of  the  work  of  the 
National  Safety  Code  Committee,  and  circulate  it  to  the  members  of  the 
General  Committee. 


20 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


information  on  standardization  activities  of  the  organizations.  It  was 
agreed  that  each  member  present  should  prepare  a brief  outline  of  the 
activities  of  the  Organization  which  he  represents,  which  bears  on  mining 
standardization,  and  forward  it  to  the  Secretary  who  would  circulate  the 
information  to  the  members. 

Circulation  of  minutes.  It  was  voted  that  copies  of  the  minutes  should 
be  sent  to  the  Secretaries  of  the  five  organizations,  in  order  that  each 
organization  might  have  in  its  central  office  a file  for  the  information  of 
its  members. 

The  meeting  adjourned  at  five  o’clock  p.  m.,  subject  to  the  call  of  the 
chair. 

Mr.  Mitke:  In  this  connection  I would  like  to  say  that  in  arranging 
the  general  program  of  the  Metal  Section,  we  have  endeavored  to  make 
the  adoption  of  standards  just  as  difficult  as  possible,  in  order  to  prevent 
any  one  man’s  ideas  being  forced  upon  the  mining  industry,  unless  it  has 
first  withstood  the  criticism  of  the  majority.  This  measure  has  been 
adopted  as  a safeguard,  and  for  the  protection  of  both  the  manufacturers 
and  the  mining  industry  at  large. 

The  meeting  then  adjourned  until  the  following  day. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


21 


NATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  CONFERENCE 

The  American  Mining  Congress 
WEDNESDAY  MORNING,  NOVEMBER  17,  1920 

Chas.  A.  Mitke,  chairman  of  the  Metal  Section  of  the  Standardization 
Committee,  presided. 

CHAIRMAN  MITKE:  The  First  National  Standardization  Conference 
will  please  come  to  order. 

In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Scholz,  who  is  unfortunately  unable  to  attend,  I 
will  open  the  meeting  by  reading  a paper  on  ‘The  Relation  of  Standard- 
ization to  Mine  Management.* 

[Mr.  Mitke’s  paper  appears  on  page  772  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  MITKE:  We  are  very  fortunate  in  having  with  us  Mr.  P.  G. 
Agnew,  a man  who  is  interested  in  the  working  out  of  national  standards. 

[Mr.  Agnew’s  paper  appears  on  page  211  of  the  Proceedings.] 

Address  by  Colonel  Roberts 

Next  follows  the  address  ‘Standardization  and  Efficiency’  prepared  by 
Col.  Warren  R.  Roberts: 

When  the  founders  of  the  American  Mining  Congress,  in  keeping  with 
custom,  selected  a motto,  they  chose  one  that  would  indicate  to  the  public 
the  purpose  for  which  this  Congress  was  organized,  and  also  the  ideals 
toward  which  it  would  strive.  No  other  words  could  better  have  expressed 
these  objects  than  “Safety,  Efficiency,  and  Conservation.” 

SAFETY  has  been  one  of  the  watchwords  of  our  Congress  from  the 
beginning.  Not  only  have  the  officials  of  our  Congress  improved  every 
opportunity  to  promote  safety  as  applied  to  the  mining  industry,  but  they 
have  been  among  the  first  to  conceive  ways  in  which  improved  and  safer 
methods  and  practices  could  be  brought  before  the  mining  industry. 

In  confirmation  of  the  above  statement,  we  remember  that  when  the 
U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines  was  in  process  of  formation  by  its  Director,  he 
had  no  more  ardent  supporter  and  efficient  adviser  than  *our  honored 
secretary,  Mr.  James  F.  Callbreath,  who  has  since,  together  with  his 
other  officials,  always  extended  a helping  hand  to  the  Bureau.  Those  of 
us  who  are  familiar  with  the  work  of  this  Bureau,  know  that  it  has  been 
the  greatest  agency  in  the  land  for  the  promotion  of  safety  in  the  mining 
industry. 

Our  Congress  has  also  co-operated  at  all  times  with  all  other  agencies 
promoting  safety  as  applied  to  mining,  and  at  the  present  time  working 


22 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


together  with  the  National  Safety  Council  and  similar  organizations  so 
far  as  their  efforts  are  directed  toward  the  mining  industry. 

EFFICIENCY,  the  much  abused  and  often  misapplied  expression,  has 
never  been  misunderstood  by  the  officials  of  our  Congress.  If  we  would 
gain  the  confidence  of  others,  and  thereby  secure  influence  with  them, 
we  must  first  be  able  to  show  that  we  have  applied  intelligently  to  our 
own  affairs  the  advice  we  offer  them.  The  conduct  of  our  work  through 
our  own  efficient  organization  has  always  been  an  example  of  efficiency 
to  the  mining  industry.  In  the  years  that  I have  been  connected  with  this 
organization,  many  times  I have  heard  prominent  men  in  the  mining  indus- 
try make  the  above  statement.  Due  to  this  fact  our  Congress  has  had 
much  influence  with  the  mining  industry  in  promoting  efficiency  added 
to  safety. 

CONSERVATION  is  a most  popular  expression  with  those  who  seek  to 
gain  public  influence.  We  talk  flippantly  of  the  conservation  of  our 
national  resources,  while  we  continue  to  waste  them.  It  is  an  acknowl- 
edged fact  that  the  American  people  is  the  most  extravagant  and  wasteful 
nation  on  earth.  Such  extravagance  is  not  applied  only  to  their  personal 
resources,  but  to  those  of  their  cities,  their  states,  and  their  nation.  We 
were  so  greatly  blessed  with  the  great  natural  resources  of  our  broad 
acres  of  fertile  land,  with  our  limitless  forests  and  our  unbounded  mineral 
possessions,  that  we  have  for  generations  gone  on  exploiting  these 
resources  in  the  way  that  were  bringing  us  the  most  immediate  results 
with  very  little  thought  of  conserving  those  wonderful  possessions. 

But  as  our  lands  were  gradually  occupied,  and  as  our  forests  dis- 
appeared, and  the  richer  of  our  mineral  resources  were  exhausted,  we 
began  to  take  account  of  our  wastefulness.  The  wiser  and  more  patriotic 
of  our  citizens  began  to  plead  for  conservation  of  these  great  resources 
and  then  I say,  this  word  became  very  popular  with  many  persons  who 
are  always  ready  and  waiting  to  ride  into  public  favor  on  the  crest  of 
some  friendly  wave.  Such  use  of  any  national  movement  like  conserva- 
tion naturally  creates  much  prejudice  with  our  people,  and  this  must  be 
overcome  by  the  industrious  and  wise  efforts  of  those  who  are  seeking 
to  promote  reaj  conservation.  Our  Mining  Congress  has  been  diligent  in 
its  efforts  to  conserve  the  energies,  the  capital  and  the  resources  of 
the  mining  industry,  thereby  living  up  to  its  motto  of  “Safety,  Efficiency, 
and  Conservation.” 

Standardization  an  Economy 

When  this  excellent  motto  was  adopted  by  the  founders  of  our  Con- 
gress, they  were  not  familiar  with  another  great  force  in  national  econ- 
omy. This  other  important  factor  was  not  then  generally  recognized, 
even  by  the  engineering  profession,  which  is  always  among  the  first  to 
point  the  way  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  safety,  efficiency,  and  conserva- 
tion. There  were  those,  however,  in  this  profession  who  did  have  the 
vision  to  recognize  that  standardization  of  methods  as  applied  to  produc- 
tion, whether  it  be  applied  to  mining,  manufacturing,  or  otherwise,  was 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


23 


the  real  basis  upon  which  should  be  built  up  the  three  structures  of 
safety,  efficiency,  and  conservation.  Those  of  us  who  are  familiar  with 
this  movement,  which  has  now  reached  national  proportions,  even  inter- 
national scope,  can  verify  the  above  statements.  However,  while  the 
foundations  for  this  new  movement  have  been  intelligently  laid,  no  mate- 
rial progress  had  been  made  up  to  the  time  when  our  Nation  was  rudely 
awakened  from  the  complaisant  tenor  of  its  ways  of  peace,  and  found  it 
necessary  immediately  to  reorganize  our  entire  national  life  to  enable  us 
to  meet  this  great  crisis  which  was  endangering  our  very  existence.  It 
took  even  such  a crisis  as  this  to  awaken  the  American  people  to  a 
realization  of  our  resources  and  of  our  capacity  as  a Nation,  but  we  did 
find  ourselves,  so  to  speak,  and  we  were  a surprise  to  all  the  nations  of 
the  earth  as  well  as  to  ourselves. 

We  were  proud  then,  and  we  are  now,  to  recount  the  inventions,  the 
creations,  and  the  accomplishments  of  our  people  when  as  a united  force 
they  went  about  this  great  task. 

But  the  bulwark  of  our  strength  at  that  time  was  the  almost  unlimited 
capacity  of  our  engineers,  scientists,  and  professional  men  generally,  to 
meet  this  great  emergency  by  inventing  new  things  and  new  methods, 
and  applying  other  things  in  more  scientific  and  practical  ways  and  other- 
wise helping  them  to  organize  our  resources  on  the  most  productive  and 
economical  basis. 

Concentration  During  War  Years 

When  the  call  came  for  more  ships,  and  when  these  could  not  be  built 
fast  enough  to  meet  the  ever-increasing  demand  for  our  shipments  to 
Europe,  a way  must  be  found  to  make  the  vessels  we  had  carry  greater 
cargoes.  Then  again,  our  scientists  and  engineers  were  called  upon  to 
meet  this  new  demand.  We  must  find  a way  they  told  us,  to  concentrate 
and  condense  our  cargoes.  This  demand  was  met  by  putting  into  prac- 
tice the  theories  of  those  who  had  advocated  standardization  of  packing, 
boxing  and  baling  of  all  products  for  transportation,  either  by  land  or 
sea.  We  cannot  go  into  detail  at  this  time  as  to  how  this  was  accomp- 
lished, but  can  only  state  that  a surprising  increase  in  shipments  was 
readily  made  by  applying  methods  of  standardization  as  above  outlined. 

Another  call  was  for  increased  production  from  our  factories  for  every 
article  needed  to  carry  on  the  war.  Again,  standardization  of  methods 
and  of  equipment  very  greatly  facilitated,  not  only  production  but  again 
transportation  of  the  articles  thus  produced.  We  could  go  on  multiplying 
examples  to  illustrate  how  standardization  made  for  efficiency  in  every 
department  of  production  and  transportation  during  the  period  of  the 
war,  but  this  brief  statement  will  suffice  to  indicate  to  you  that  any 
agency  which  was  the  basis  of  the  greatest  economics  that  we  wrought 
during  this  period,  must  have  value  which  should  be  app'ied  to  the  same 
industries  and  to  others  in  times  of  peace. 

We  have  not  forgotten  the  lessons  we  learned  during  the  strenuous 
time  of  the  war  when  necessity  drove  us  to  acomplishment..  We  have, 
therefore,  been  diligent  in  trying  to  apply  to  our  industries  as  now  re- 


24 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


organized,  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  standardization  in  methods  of 
production  and  of  manufacture. 

The  American  Mining  Congress  immediately  after  the  war  undertook 
to  organize  a division  to  promote  standardization  of  mining  methods,  min- 
ing equipment,  etc.,  for  this  industry. 

Result  of  Conferences  on  Standardization 

This  work  soon  gained  such  prominence  that  other  national  organiza- 
tions interested  in  the  mining  industry,  and  more  particularly  in  this 
movement  of  standardization,  suggested  that  a conference  be  held  with 
the  object  of  co-ordinating  the  work  of  these  various  national  societies 
and  organizations.  These  conferences  have  all  borne  fruit,  and  this  work 
of  co-ordination  has  already  been  accomplished  through  an  organization 
set  up  especially  for  this  purpose,  namely,  the  American  Engineering 
Standards  Committee. 

The  way  has,  therefore,  been  opened,  the  trails  blazed  and  it  only  re- 
mains for  those  who  are  promoting  this  important  work  to  carry  it  for- 
ward to  consummation,  thereby  bringing  to  the  mining  industry  through 
standardization,  Safety,  Efficiency,  and  Conservation. 

May  we  not  hope  also,  that  progressive  men  in  other  industries,  seeing 
the  economies  we  shall  work  through  standardization,  for  the  mining 
industry,  will  be  encouraged  to  ‘Go  thou  and  do  likewise.’  ” 

MR.  MITKE:  Mr.  T.  T.  Brewster  will  speak  to  us  on  ‘Standard  Mine 
Accounting.’ 

[Mr.  Brewster’s  paper  will  be  found  on  page  818  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  MITKE:  Mr.  Brewster  has  given  us  an  interesting  talk,  and 
those  of  you  who  are  interested  in  this  subject  can  obtain  copies  of  the 
report;  also  copies  of  the  paper  Mr.  Agnew  brought  for  distribution. 

We  have  with  us  Mr.  James  Milliken,  president  of  the  Industrial  Car 
Manufacturing  Institute  of  Pittsburgh. 

In  presenting  the  attached  report  Mr.  Milliken  made  the  following 
explanatory  remarks: 

Gentlemen,  this  report  is  not  nearly  as  formidable  as  it  looks.  The 
time  for  adjournment  is  about  here,  and  I am  not  going  to  detain  you 
very  long.  I did  write  a short  address  and  I will  turn  it  over  to  the 
Secretary  and  you  can  read  it  in  the  Proceedings. 

I want  to  compliment  you . on  what  has  been  done  this  year  in  the 
matter  of  standards.  It  represents  a good  piece  of  work,  and  I would 
like  to  emphasize  first  a few  remarks  that  I made  yesterday  to  the  Coal 
Mining  Section,  because  I think  it  applies  to  all  standardization  work. 

Standards  in  Railroads 

First  is  your  method  of  procedure — the  correlation  of  your  committees. 
It  is  one  thing  to  prepare  standards,  and  another  to  get  your  members  to 
adopt  them  entirely.  You  can  make  all  the  standards  you  want,  and 
unless  your  members  will  actually  agree  to  use  them,  you  might  as  well 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


not  have  any  standards.  My  experience  has  covered  a good  many  years 
in  railroad  service,  and  you  probably  all  know  that  the  railroads,  in  their 
car  construction,  have  done  a great  deal  in  the  way  of  making  standards. 
Although  they  started  in  1872,  the  full  standard  car  is  not  yet  being  built. 
However,  the  parts  of  cars  that  wear  out  are  standardized  and  are  inter- 
changeable, so  that  if  a Pennsylvania  car  in  the  East  wears  out  a wheel, 
or  something  of  that  kind,  either  here  or  in  San  Francisco,  the  repair 
man  there  puts  on  a piece  from  his  own  stock.  In  that  way,  the  cost  of 
repairs  has  been  materially  reduced. 

I would  like  to  suggest  that  instead  of  making  standards  as  you  start 
out,  you  make  recommended  practice.  I think  you  will  find  it  will  be 
accepted  by  your  members  much  more  readily  than  if  you  tried  to  force 
a standard  onto  them.  I think  the  best  way  to  accomplish  that  is  to 
submit  all  suggestions  to  members  individually  in  the  way  of  a recom- 
mendation; then  you  will  ascertain  completely  whether  your  recom- 
mended practices  will  be  suitable,  and  after  such  practices  have  been  in 
use  for  a few  months,  or  a year  or  two,  they  can  readily  be  advanced  to 
standards. 

The  Committee  that  I am  connected  with,  known  as  the  Industrial 
Manufacturers  Institute,  is  trying  to  standardize  industrial  equipment. 
Outside  of  a standard  coach  for  railroads,  there  are  really  no  standards. 
We  have  been  in  operation  about  1 y2  years,  and  have  adopted  a large 
number  of  recommended  practices,  the  items  that  you  are  particularly 
interested  in  being  mine-cars.  We  have  adopted  recommended  practices, 
covering  all  kinds  of  materials  used,  such  as  bolts  and  nuts,  castings  for 
malleable  iron,  gray  iron  and  steel,  general  pipe-unions,  welded  pipe, 
rivets,  screw-threads,  structural  steel,  and  so  forth. 

Variety  in  Mine-Cars 

It  is  really  remarkable  how  few  standards  there  are  in  the  building  of 
mine-cars.  This  Commission  that  I am  connected  with  can  do  a good 
many  things,  but  we  canont  do  it  all.  It  is  up  to  you  gentlemen  to  estab- 
lish standards,  and  then  the  car  manufacturers  will  be  only  too  glad  to 
build  what  you  want.  But  they  do  not  want  to  have  to  build  a different 
type  of  car  for  every  mine,  and  there  certainly  is  not  any  occasion 
for  that. 

At  the  present  time  we  are  trying  to  standardize  treads  and  flanges  of 
wheels.  Your  present  flanges  and  treads  of  wheels  shows  a wide  range, 
resulting  in  a tremendous  amount  of  waste  material.  There  is  certainly 
one  correct  tread  and  flange  for  an  18-in.  wheel,  and  there  is  one  correct 
weight  for  your  different  capacity  cars.  If  you  adopt  one  standard  flange 
and  one  weight  for  capacity,  if  you  will  get  the  best  engineering  talent, 
if  you  will  get  the  best  designed  wheel,  you  will  not  be  carrying  around 
excess  weight,  neither  will  you  have  a wheel  that  is  too  light  for  the 
service. 

The  same  thing  applies  to  practically  all  the  details  of  cars.  I am  not 
going  to  mention  them  all,  but  I would  like  to  mention  Turner  bearings. 
You  have  five  or  six  different  capacities,  from  one  to  five  tons — a few  half 


26 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


tons.  The  majority  of  them  have  roller  bearings  that  are  rather  expen- 
sive to  make.  There  are  some  18  or  20  different  sized  Turners  for  those 
four  or  five  capacity  cars.  Some  of  them  are  li%6  in.,  and  another  is  2 
in.,  and  another  is  2y16  in. 

It  costs  money  to  have  three  size  of  roller  bearings  made,  where  one 
size  can  be  made  in  three  times  the  quantity,  and  for  that  reason  you  will 
get  them  for  considerably  less  price.  There  are  really  many  advantages 
in  standardization,  and  I want  to  assure  you  that  the  Industrial  Car 
Manufacturers  Institute  is  only  too  willing  to  co-operate  with  you,  with 
your  operators,  mine  superintendents,  and  with  your  engineers,  and 
wherever  we  can  be  of  service,  we  will  only  be  too  glad  to  do  it. 

The  meeting  then  adjourned  until  the  following  morning. 


THURSDAY  MORNING,  NOVEMBER  18,  1920 

Carl  Scholz,  Acting-Chairman  of  the  Coal  Section,  and  Chas.  A.  Mitke, 
Chairman  of  the  Metal  Section,  presided. 

CHAIRMAN  MITKE:  This  is  a continuation  of  yesterday’s  meeting, 
and  is  the  final  meeting  of  the  Standardization  Conference.  The  first 
speaker  is  Mr.  G.  K.  Burgess,  a representative  of  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Standards,  a man  whom  you  have  heard  before,  and  who  will  give  us  an 
intelligent  view  of  the  work  of  the  Bureau. 

[Mr.  Burgess’  paper  appears  on  page  794  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  I have  been  requested  by  Mr.  Mitke  to  read  the  follow- 
ing resolution,  which  will  be  passed  without  discussion  to  the  Resolu- 
tions Committee: 

“Whereas,  it  is  desirable  that  standardization  in  the  mining  in- 
dustry be  carried  out  on  a national  scale,  in  so  far  as  it  is  possible 
to  do  so;  and 

“Whereas,  it  is  the  desire  of  the  American  Mining  Congress  to 
co-operate  in  the  fullest  measure  with  other  bodies  working  to  the 
same  end;  be  it 

“ Resolved , That  steps  be  taken,  under  such  arrangements  as  may 
be  mutually  agreed  upon  by  the  bodies  interested,  through  the  Gen- 
eral Correlating  Committee  for  Mining  Standardization,  upon  which 
the  Congress  is  represented,  to  assure  that  the  working  standardiza- 
tion committees  may  be  recognized  as  sectional  committees  of  the 
American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  in  order  that  the  stand- 
ards prepared  may  receive  final  approval  as  American  Engineering 
Standards.” 

Reports  of  All  Committees  to  be  Correlated 

I might  add  that  arrangements  have  already  been  made  by  the  Ameri- 
can Mining  Congress  to  have  a permanent  secretary  stationed  at  Wash- 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


27 


ington,  who  will  correlate  the  reports  of  the  various  committees.  As  act- 
ing-chairman of  the  Coal  Section,  I would  like  to  say,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  Metal  Section,  that  the  Coal  Section  meetings  created  a great  deal  of 
outside  interest,  so  much  so  that  one  meeting  extended  over  3y2  hours, 
and  it  was  hardly  completed  then.  A number  of  the  Committees  that  had 
submitted  reports  were  so  impressed  with  the  work  which  had  been  done, 
and  with  the  work  to  be  done,  that  they  asked  that  their  reports  be  re- 
turned so  as  to  be  revised  and  put  into  new  form.  Perhaps  a number  of 
our  Committees  were  not  quite  aware  of  the  final  matters  to  be  accom- 
plished and  we  discovered  that  in  many  cases  practices  were  referred  to 
rather  than  equipment;  and  it  may  be  necessary  to  augment  that  Com- 
mittee by  a committee  on  practices,  rather  than  on  equipment  as  we  now 
have.  We  are  much  gratified  with  the  interest  that  has  been  developed, 
and  we  hope  that  we  will  be  able  to  do  a great  deal  of  good  for  the  pro- 
fession as  well  as  for  the  manufacturers  interested. 

MR.  MITKE:  Right  in  line  with  what  Mr.  Scholz  has  said,  I have  an 
announcement  to  make: 

As  you  are  aware,  the  standardization  of  mining  equipment  is  closely 
allied  with  the  standardization  of  operations,  and  it  is  most  difficult  to 
standardize  on  one  branch  without  standardizing  the  other.  It  has, 
therefore,  been  decided  by  the  American  Mining  Congress,  to  enlarge  the 
scope  of  all  the  working  committees  of  both  the  Coal  and  Metal  Sections 
to  cover  operations  as  well  as  equipment. 

Mr.  T.  O.  McGrath,  auditor  for  the  Shattuck-Arizona  Copper  Co.  of 
Bisbee,  will  now  address  us  on  the  subject  of  ‘Standardization  of  Metal 
Mining  Accounting.’ 

MR.  McGRATH:  I would  like  to  say  that  this  is  nothing  more  than  a 
preliminary  presentation;  it  is  not  a detailed  application  to  any  one  par- 
ticular instance,  it  is  a general  discussion  preparatory  to  taking  up  the 
matter  in  detail. 

A Regulation  Favorable  to  Mines  Not  Taken  Advantage  of 

When  I was  at  the  Tax  Conference  here  the  other  day,  I talked  to  one 
of  the  men  connected  with  the  Tax  Department,  and  I was  much  sur- 
prised to  learn  that  one  of  the  most  important  provisions  in  the  last  regu- 
lations had  not  been  complied  with  or  had  not  been  taken  advantage  of, 
except  by  only  one  or  two  mining  companies  in  the  United  States,  so  I 
thought  I would  mention  this  to  you,  because  the  last  regulations  make 
provision  whereby  these  companies  which  had  a large  value  as  of  March, 
1912,  saved  themselves  thousands  of  dollars,  and  in  the  case  of  larger 
companies,  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars.  The  article  is  844  of  the 
Internal  Revenue  Department.  I was  told  that  there  were  only  two  or 
three  companies  that  had  taken  advantage  of  it.  That  is  not  only  inter- 
esting of  this  year,  but  it  is  particularly  so  in  the  fact  that  the  Depart- 
ment has  not  finally  settled  any  of  the  tax  returns  since  1917;  in  other 
words,  your  tax  reports  for  1917,  1918,  and  1919  are  still  in  abeyance. 
As  I say,  for  some  of  the  larger  companies  it  amounts  to  hundreds  of 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


28 

thousands  of  dollars.  If  you  wish  later  on  to  have  me  explain  this  article, 
I will  be  glad  to  do  it. 

[Mr.  McGrath’s  paper  will  be  found  on  page  806  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  HANSON  SMITH:  In  relation  to  Article  844— 

MR.  McGRATH:  It  would  only  take  a minute  to  explain  it:  Article 
844  allows  you  to  depreciate  and  deplete  the  amount  of  your  capital 
charges,  not  only  in  the  amount  of  your  investment  in  capital  assets, 
but  up  to  the  amount  of  your  value  as  of  March  1,  1913;  they  allow  your 
asset  charges  or  capital  charges,  right  up  to  the  value  of  that  date,  which 
is  appreciation.  You  take  that  up  on  your  records.  Then  when  you 
deplete  those  asset  charges,  you  not  only  deplete  the  investment  charge, 
but  you  deplete  the  appreciation  value  that  they  allowed  to  you,  and 
set  it  up  here  as  depreciation  and  depletion.  Now,  when  you  do  that, 
Article  844  tells  you  that  if  you  will  divide  your  depletion  charge — if 
your  value  was  greater  than  the  investment,  and  also  your  depreciation 
charge,  if  you  wrote  it  up — if  you  divide  it  into  depletion  of  investment 
and  depletion  of  appreciation,  you  can  use  the  amount  of  realized  appre- 
ciation, for  invested  capital  in  making  your  return.  And  you  can  do 
that  since  March  1,  1913,  or  practically  seven  years.  And  in  the  case  of 
some  mines  where  they  had  a very  large  appreciation  as  of  that  date, 
that  additional  invested  capital  will  amount  to  millions  of  dollars,  which 
you  will  be  allowed  to  use  in  figuring  up  your  excess  profits  tax,  and  in 
some  cases  that  will  amount  to  hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars. 

MR.  MITKE:  Mr.  Lawrence  K.  Diffenderfer,  treasurer  of  the  Vanadium 
Corporation  of  America,  has  sent  an  interesting  paper  on  general  methods 
of  mine  accounting,  which  I will  ask  Mr.  McGrath  to  present  in  Mr. 
Diffenderfer’s  absence. 

MR.  McGRATH:  This  is  an  individual  presentation  of  the  applica- 
tion of  mining  principles  to  a mine,  and  probably  will  be  very  interesting 
to  anyone  who  would  like  to  see  the  system  applied  in  an  individual 
case.  It  brings  up  two  good  points:  one  is  being  very  well  versed  in 
the  operations;  another,  equipment  records. 

Two  Papers  Presented 

[An  abstract  of  Mr.  Diffenderfer’s  paper  appears  on  page  803  of  the 
Proceedings.  There  were  13  typical  forms  of  reports  (including  cash, 
timekeeper,  payroll,  storekeeper,  supplies,  purchasing,  depreciation,  and 
costs),  but  it  was  found  impracticable  to  reproduce  them.  1 

[Mr.  Joseph  F.  Merrill,  Director  of  the  School  of  Mines  and  Engineer- 
ing, University  of  Utah,  representing  the  World  Metric  Standardization 
Council,  presented  a paper  on  the  use  of  the  metric  system  in  place  of 
the  present  method  of  weights  and  measures.  The  organizing  members 
of  this  Council  are  the  Foreign  Trade  Club  of  San  Francisco,  American 
Metric  Association,  London  and  Manchester  Decimal  Association,  Ameri- 
can Chemical  Society,  and  American  Wholesale  Grocers’  Association. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


29 


There  are  on  file  in  Washington  100,000  petitions,  urging  gradual  adop- 
tion of  the  metric  system  in  America.  Of  58,226  petitions  received  under 
one  questionnaire,  there  were  only  426  opponents  to  the  suggestion.  The 
advocates  included  many  prominent  men,  in  science,  education,  and  com- 
merce. Mr.  Merrill  stated  that  its  advantages  were  simplicity,  economy, 
and  universality.  The  remainder  of  the  paper  consisted  of  quotatiops 
from  public  men  who  were  in  sympathy  with  the  movement.] 


30 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


COAL  MINING  SECTION,  STANDARDIZATION  COMMITTEE 

American  Mining  Congress 
NOVEMBER  16,  1920 

Mr.  Carl  Scholz,  Jr.,  presided. 

CHAIRMAN  SCHOLZ:  Gentlemen:  According  to  the  program, 

Colonel  Warren  R.  Roberts,  who  is  chairman  of  the  Coal  Section,  was  to 
preside  and  present  his  report,  but  unfortunately  he  could  not  attend,  so 
has  asked  me  to  present  his  report  and  act  in  his  stead.  The  report  is 
as  follows: 

Report  of  Colonel  Roberts 

The  Coal  Mining  Branch  of  your  Standardization  Division  of  the 
American  Mining  Congress  presents  the  following  report  as  representing 
the  progress  made  during  the  year  since  our  last  annual  Convention. 

This  report  is  rendered  by  the  General  Committee  directing  Standard- 
ization for  the  Coal  Mining  Branch,  and  on  behalf  of  the  seven  Sub-Com- 
mittees having  in  hand  the  work  of  improving  the  practice  and  standard- 
izing the  methods  and  equipment  for  the  coal-mining  industry. 

The  first  report  of  this  General  Committee  presented  at  our  last  annual 
Convention  indicates  that  this  work  was,  at  that  time,  only  fairly 
begun;  that  is  to  say,  the  General  Committee  and  the  various  Sub-Com- 
mittees had  been  organized  and  had  held  a series  of  conferences  just 
prior  to  the  annual  Convention,  at  which  time  they  had  developed  and 
agreed  upon  a general  program  of  standardization  to  be  applied  to  coal- 
mining practice,  equipment,  etc.  The  Conference  also  developed  ar- 
rangements whereby  the  work  to  be  performed  by  the  several  Sub- 
committees would  be  co-ordinated  through  the  General  Committee. 

A comparison  of  the  report  rendered  by  your  General  Committee  a 
year  ago,  and  one  herewith  presented,  suggests  to  your  Chairman  im- 
pressive facts,  which  he  should  call  to  your  attention  before  entering 
into  the  more  detailed  subjects  contained  in  our  report. 

We  are  impressed  first,  with  the  wisdom  shown  by  your  Committee 
in  those  first  conferences,  when  the  whole  broad  subject  of  standardiza- 
tion was  discussed  and  conclusions  reached  covering  the  general  scope 
which  this  work  should  assume,  as  well  as  the  limitations  that  should 
best  be  applied  to  give  the  final  results  which  would  commend  them  to 
the  industry,  and  thereby  secure  their  adoption  in  general  practice. 

Good  Work  Accomplished 

The  several  reports  presented  by  the  Sub-Committees  which  are 
attached  to  and  form  a part  of  this  brief  report  of  your  General  Commit- 
tee, deserve  special  mention.  Even  a careful  study  of  the  reports  of 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


31 


these  Sub-Committees  would  not  indicate  to  you  the  vast  amount  of 
earnest  discussion  and  careful  consideration  which  has  been  required  of 
the  members  of  the  Sub-Committees  to  reach  the  conclusions  contained  in 
their  condensed  reports.  Your  General  Committee,  therefore,  wishes 
to  commend  to  you  the  excellent  work  that  has  been  done  by  all  of  these 
Committees  with  the  exception  of  two,  and  for  whom  extenuating  cir- 
cumstances seem  to  offer  ample  excuse. 

Our  members  generally,  not  being  familiar  with  the  work  of  our 
Standardization  Division,  it  may  be  well  to  outline  briefly  the  organiza- 
tion which  is  carrying  on  this  important  work  on  behalf  of  the  mining 
industry.  This  Division  is  composed  of  two  branches  representing  Metal 
Mining,  and  Coal  Mining.  The  work  of  each  of  these  branches  is  directed 
by  a General  Committee,  composed  of  the  Chairman  of  each  of  the  Sub- 
committees having  direct  charge  of  the  Standardization  of  practice  and 
equipment  in  their  respective  classifications  of  the  work.  The  purpose 
of  the  General  Committees  is  to  review  and  co-ordinate  the  work  of  the 
several  sub-committees. 

The  Chairmen  of  the  two  General  Committees  assist  in  organizing  and 
directing  the  work  for  their  respective  branches  and  finally  co-ordinate 
the  work  of  the  two  Branches. 

Standardization  Attracts  Attention 

This  work  of  Standardization,  as  carried  on  by  the  Mining  Congress 
during  the  past  two  years,  has  attracted  much  attention  from  other 
national  organizations  and  societies  interested  in  the  mining  industry. 
Certain  of  these  national  organizations  are  interested  in  this  work  of 
Standardization,  and  in  the  campaign  of  safety  as  applied  to  the  indus- 
try. This  community  of  interest  resulted  in  the  calling  of  a conference 
of  representatives  of  these  various  national  organizations  and  societies, 
which  formulated  a program  for  co-ordinating  the  work  in  which  they 
were  mutually  interested.  After  a thorough  discussion  of  the  subject 
by  representatives  in  conference  from  all  of  these  organizations,  it  was 
decided  that  the  co-ordination  of  this  work  of  Standardization  could  best 
be  carried  on  through  another  national  organization  set  up  especially  for 
this  purpose,  namely,  the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee. 

A separate  report  will  be  presented  to  the  Standardization  Confer- 
ence on  this  subject,  and  we  will  therefore  only  state  that  your  Stand- 
ardization Division  is  in  hearty  sympathy  with  this  movement  for  co- 
ordinating and  giving  a national  character  to  this  work  of  Standardiza- 
tion for  the  mining  industry. 

Invitation  has  been  extended  by  the  Chairmen  of  your  two  General 
Committees  to  all  the  national  organizations  and  societies  interested  in 
Standardization  of  mining  methods  and  equipment,  to  attend  the  first 
National  Standardization  Conference,  and  to  participate  in  the  discussion 
and  work  generally  of  the  conference.  We  are  pleased  to  advise  that 
representatives  have  been  sent  to  our  conference  by  all  of  these  organiza- 
tions and  societies. 

This  work  of  Standardization  has  now  been  put  on  a truly  national 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


basis,  and  the  American  Mining  Congress  may  have  a just  pride  in  the 
part  it  has  had  in  helping  accomplish  these  results,  which  indicate  a 
final  consummation  of  this  important  constructive  work  for  the  mining 
industry. 

A Comprehensive  Program 

We  must  bear  in  mind  that  while  a great  deal  has  been  accomplished 
as  set  forth  above,  that  we  must  not  slacken  our  efforts,  in  fact  our 
energies  must  be  multiplied  to  meet  the  growing  requirements  of  the 
comprehensive  program  we  have  undertaken.  We  believe  that  the  final 
benefits  will  fully  justify  all  the  labor  and  patience  required  by  those 
having  the  vision  to  see  the  final  results  to  be  accomplished.  In  pre- 
senting the  reports  of  our  Sub-Committees — all  of  which  are  attached 
hereto — we  recommend  a careful  review  of  these  reports  by  our  General 
Committee  at  its  first  session  of  the  Standardization  Conference.  Such 
review  of  these  reports  will  indicate  the  necessity  for  the  co-ordination 
of  their  recommendations.  To  illustrate:  referring  to  the  reports  of  the 
Sub-Committees  on  Mining  and  Loading  Equipment,  and  the  Committee 
on  Underground  Transportation,  we  note  that  the  track  gages  adopted 
by  these  two  Sub-Committees  do  not  agree.  The  General  Committee, 
therefore,  in  conference  with  the  representatives  of  the  Sub-Committees 
should  harmonize  such  features  of  their  reports.  This  is  only  one  illus- 
tration of  several  that  could  be  mentioned  indicating  the  necessity  for 
the  very  careful  review  of  these  reports  by  the  General  Committee. 

The  General  Committee  should  also,  in  reviewing  these  reports,  con- 
sider carefully  each  and  every  one  of  their  recommendations  to  the 
end,  that  we  should  not  suggest  standards  for  adoption  by  the  industry 
which  shall  meet  with  general  opposition.  We  must  always  bear  in  mind 
that  standards  require  general  adoption  by  the  industry  to  make  them  of 
value. 

We  recommend  further  that  the  General  Committee  refer  to  the  Gen- 
eral Conference  on  Standardization  all  subjects  on  which  they  believe 
that  a general  discussion  by  the  conference  would  be  beneficial. 

It  will  be  found  on  reviewing  these  reports,  that  many  important  ques- 
tions justify  a very  broad  and  full  discussion  before  final  recommenda* 
tions  should  be  made  by  our  General  Committee  to  the  Conference  for 
adoption. 

Procedure 

After  the  adoption  of  these  reports  as  revised  by  the  General  Com- 
mittee, or  by  the  General  Committee  in  conjunction  with  the  Standardiza- 
tion Conference  as  suggested  just  above,  we  then  recommend  that  these 
final,  approved  reports  be  submitted  to  the  Standardization  Conference 
for  approval  and  adoption. 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  I will  call  on  Mr.  Thomas  T.  Brewster,  chairman  of 
the  Committee  on  Cost  Accounting,  National  Coal  Association. 

MR.  BREWSTER:  I have  not  prepared  a set  address,  but  have  brought 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


33 


with  me  150  copies  of  the  report  of  the  National  Coal  Association,  which 
was  presented  to  that  body  at  its  annual  meeting  a year  ago.  That 
report  has  found  favor  with  the  Treasury  Department,  also  with  public 
accountants;  and  a number  of  the  coal  operators  throughout  the  country 
have  adopted  this  form  of  accounting.  What  I propose  doing  later  is  to 
make  some  remarks  introducing  that  report,  referring  to  its  salient 
features,  and  then  distribute  the  copies  mentioned. 

[An  abstract  of  Mr.  Brewster’s  paper  appears  on  page  81S  of  the  Pro- 
ceedings.] 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  The  Committee  would  like  to  have  a -written  report 
from  all  the  Chairmen.  It  need  not  necessarily  be  long,  but  they  should 
give  some  of  their  thoughts  for  discussion.  Standardization  work  is  not 
simple;  in  fact,  it  is  a difficult  problem,  because  we  meet  opposition  from 

Committees  Include  all  Technical  Men 

the  most  unexpected  quarters.  In  selecting  my  committee  I included 
three  coal  operators,  three  mining  engineers,  and  the  remainder  is  made 
up  of  representatives  of  the  manufacturers.  For  instance;  Mr.  A.  V. 
Kiser  is  chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Underground  Power  and  Trans- 
mission, and  that  Committee  has  made  a voluminous  report,  perhaps  the 
best  report  of  any  of  them.  They  are  evidently  composed  of  workers 
and  men  who  know  things,  because  they  have  surprised  me  with  a num- 
ber of  facts  which  I did  not  know  existed.  I will  be  glad  to  have  Mr. 
Kiser  give  us  a resume  of  the  salient  points  of  his  report. 

MR.  KISER:  I might  say  that  we  experienced  serious  difficulty  in 
getting  men  to  work  on  these  Committees.  We  found  that  many  of 
them  whom  we  wanted  gave  as  an  excuse  that  they  were  too  busy,  and 
we  concluded  in  the  event  that  we  required  assistance  in  the  future, 
that  we  would  get  someone  who  was  in  an  official  position  with  the 
American  Mining  Congress,  to  write  the  president  or  vice-president  of 
• these  companies,  and  put  the  case  before  them,  and  tell  how  urgent  it 
was  that  their  engineers  get  in  on  this  work. 

[The  joint  report  of  the  Sub-Committees  on  Standardization  of  Under- 
ground Power  Transmission  and  of  Power  Equipment  appears  cn  page 
688  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  Are  there  any  other  remarks  in  connection  with  the 
report  of  the  Committee  on  Underground  Power  and  Transmission?  If 
so,  now  is  the  time  to  present  them. 

Report  By  Mr.  Scholz 

The  report  of  the  Committee  on  Mining  and  Loading  is  short,  and  was 
written  by  myself.  It  is  as  follows: 

The  Sub-Committee  on  Mining  and  Loading  Equipment  submits  the  fol- 
lowing report  on  its  activity  during  the  past  year: 

1.  The  increasing  cost  of  coal  production,  coupled  with  the  difficulties 
in  obtaining  efficient  and  sufficient  labor  for  hand  mining,  makes  the 


34 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


adoption  of  mechanical  means  for  mining  and  loading  coal  more  im- 
portant than  heretofore,  and  it  is  recommended  that  manufacturers  and 
mine  operators,  with  their  engineers,  co-operate  more  freely  in  the  use 
of  equipment  now  available,  with  the  view  of  developing  methods  by  the 
use  of  which  better  returns  be  obtained  from  such  machinery  as  it  now 
on  the  market. 

2.  We  recommend  that  in  the  construction  of  machines,  the  size  and 
speed  of  motors,  gears,  drive-chains,  and  other  parts  be  standardized  as 
far  as  possible,  so  as  to  simplify  the  repairs  and  renewals  of  machines. 

3.  We  recommend  that  the  award  of  the  Bituminous  Coal  Commission, 
with  reference  to  the  use  of  labor-saving  devices,  be  given  the  widest 
possible  publicity,  thereby  encouraging  the  installation  and  use  of  labor- 
saving  devices,  particularly  in  those  districts  where  such  machinery 
has  heretofore  been  opposed  by  the  United  Mine  Workers  organization. 

4.  We  recommend  that  the  Standardization  Committee  of  the  Ameri- 
can Mining  Congress  request  mining  schools  and  similar  institutions  to 
co-operate  with  this  Committee,  and  through  them,  with  the  manufac- 
turers of  mining  equipment,  and  coal  operators  in  the  development  of 
mining  methods  to  enable  the  greatest  possible  extraction  of  coal. 


Following  is  a brief  of  the  discussion  on  the  Report  of  the  Sub- 
Committee  on  Standardization  of  Mining  and  Loading  Equipment 
by  the  Chairman  of  the  General  Committee: 

Machines  for  Rapid  Development 

Mr.  James  Needham,  general  superintendent  for  the  St.  Paul  Coal  Co. 
and  Republic  Coal  Co.,  said  that  the  entry  driving  and  loading  machine  is 
perhaps  the  only  solution  for  the  rapid  development  of  a coal  mine,  but  he 
believes  that  these  machines  require  perfecting  before  they  can  be  con- 
ered  entirely  satisfactory.  He  stated  that  the  long-wall  mines  in  northern 
Illinois  are  perhaps  in  as  great  need  of  mechanical  loading  appliances  as 
any  other  mining  field,  but  it  has  been  found  difficult  to  develop  a satis- 
factory machine  for  long-wall  mining,  especially  with  the  present  exces- 
sive cost  of  operation.  He  hopes  that  a satisfactory  machine  for  these 
mines  may  be  developed,  as  present  conditions  are  very  discouraging. 

Mr.  W.  D.  Brennan,  who  was  connected  with  the  Hannah  property  of 
the  Union  Pacific  Railway,  explained  to  the  Conference  how  loading 
machines  were  used  in  a coal  seam  35  ft.  in  thickness  and  on  a 17°  pitch, 
where  the  rooms  were  driven  along  the  strike.  He  stated  that  they  had 
many  difficulties  in  adopting  these  machines  to  this  service,  but  stated 
that  after  a number  of  years  of  experimenting  they  now  had  machines  in 
continuous  operation  which  were  giving  them  a production  of  from  800 
to  1000  tons  a day,  with  only  12  men  actually  used  in  the  operation  of 
these  shovels.  Additional  men,  of  course,  were  required  for  handling 
of  cars  to  and  from  the  shovel,  etc. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Mr.  Scholz  urged  that  for  loading  machines  we  should  adhere  to  220 
volts  for  alternating  and  250  volts  for  direct  current.  Experience  had 
taught  him  that  these  voltages  were  preferable  and  most  economical. 

Mr.  Kiser  stated  that  the  large  operators  of  western  Pennsylvania 
took  exception  to  this  recommendation  by  Mr.  Scholz  and  considerable 
discussion  on  the  matter  followed.  One  of  the  recommendations  of  this 
Committee  being  that  the  size  of  motors,  gears,  drive-chains,  and  other 
parts  be  standardized  so  as  to  simplify  the  repairs  and  renewals  of  dif- 
ferent makes  of  machines,  a considerable  discussion  followed  as  to  the 
possibility  or  desirability  of  carrying  out  this  recommendation. 

Mr.  Ebe  added  that  if  it  had  not  been  for  mechanical  appliances  it 
would  have  been  impossible  for  his  company  to  mine  400  or  500  tons  of 
coal  daily. 

In  reply  to  a query  by  Mr.  Kaseman  of  New  Mexico,  whether  it  was  the 
tendency  of  inventors  to  devote  their  attention  to  such  devices  as  the 
steam-shovel  for  large  veins,  or  for  low  veins,  Mr.  Scholz  said  that  he 
believed  most  of  the  machines  were  for  relatively  thick  seams — from  4 to 
8 ft.  Some  shoveling  or  conveying  machines  will  operate  in  coal  as  low 

as  5%  ft. 

It  seemed  to  be  the  consensus  of  opinion,  however,  that  progress  could 
be  made  along  these  lines  and  that  small  differences  between  the  manu- 
facturers on  certain  details  could  be  avoided  and  in  time  that  with  the 
co-operation  of  the  manufacturers  very  considerable  improvement  would 
be  made  which  would  work  for  economy  in  the  maintenance  of  such 
machines. 

With  intelligent  and  conservative  requests  by  the  operators  through 
their  Standardization  Committees,  it  is  fully  b'elieved  that  the  manufac- 
turers will  end  such  co-operation  and  that  we  shall  finally  progress  much 
further  along  these  lines  than  at  present  would  seem  possible,  espe- 
cially to  those  who  have  not  given  a great  deal  of  thought  to  the  matter. 

CHAIRMAN  SCHOLZ:  The  next  matter  on  the  program  is  the  report  . 
of  the  Commitee  on  Standardization  of  Outside  Coal-Handling  Equip- 
ment, of  which  Col.  Roberts  is  chairman,  and  will  be  presented  by  Mr. 
Needham: 

Report  on  Outside  Coal-Handling  Equipment 

The  Chairman  of  this  Sub-Committee  has  had  such  time  as  he  could 
spare  from  his  regular  duties  almost  entirely  occupied  with  the  work 
required  as  Chairman  of  the  General  Committee  of  the  Coal  Mining 
Branch,  consequently  the  work  of  this  Sub-Committee  has  not  received 
proper  attention.  We  therefore  suggest  that  the  General  Committee 
select  a new  Chairman  for  this  Sub-Committee.  The  present  Chairman 
will  very  gladly  serve  as  a member  of  this  Sub-Committee,  but  hopes 
that  the  General  Committee  will  select  from  this  Sub-Committee,  as  at 
present  constituted,  someone  else  to  act  as  Chairman. 


36 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


It  was  the  sense  of  this  Sub-Committee,  as  indicated  in  its  report 
to  the  General  Committee  at  our  last  annual  Convention,  that  each  Sub- 
committee should  first  concern  itself  with  the  more  general  and  im- 
portant matters  relating  to  the  designing  and  installation  of  equipment 
included  under  their  sub-division  of  Standardization  and  Mining  Equip- 
ment To  this  end  it  was  recommended  that  each  Sub-Committee  should 
make  a careful  study  of  present  practice,  as  related  to  the  work  of  their 
Sub-Committee,  and  include  in  their  first  work  the  improvement  and 
standardization  of  the  general  practice  and  methods  relating  to  their 
sub-division  work,  and  that  this  work  should  then  be  followed  by  a 
study  of  equipment  included  in  their  sub  division  of  work,  and  endeavor 
to  improve  and  standardize  such  equipment. 

Following  this  general  and  comprehensive  program,  this  Sub-Com- 
mittee has  taken  under  consideration,  and  begs  to  report  suggestions 
and  recommendations  for  the  consideration  of  the  General  Committee 
as  follows: 

The  study  of  present  practice  as  related  to  the  designing  and  building 
of  coal  tipples,  head-frames,  etc.,  indicates  that  one  of  the  first  and  most 
important  duties  of  this  Sub-Committee  is  to  try  and  improve  and 
standardize  the  present  practice  which  relates  to  the  safety  and  economy 
in  the  operation  of  this  unit  of  a mining  plant. 

Railroad  Clearances 

A study  of  present  practice  indicates  that  there  is  no  uniformity  in 
the  clearance  either  horizontally  or  vertically  for  railroad  tracks  passing 
beneath  tipples.  This  lack  of  uniformity  and  good  practice  in  the  various 
coalfields,  has  compelled  certain  railroads  to  promulgate  regulations 
governing  such  clearances*  In  some  instances,  these  regulations  seem  to 
be  adequate  and  reasonable,  and  in  other  instances,  they  seem  to  be  un- 
duly conservative  and  impose  on  coal  companies  providing  new  facilities, 
expense  that  even  good  practice  and  safety  would  not  require.  Your 
Committee,  therefore,  after  careful  consideration  of  this  matter  makes 
the  following  recommendations  regarding  clearances  for  railroad  cars: 

A standard  practice  should  be  adopted,  which  would  provide  for  a 
lateral  clearance  between  the  widest  cars  passing  under  such  tipple,  and 
the  nearest  tipple  support,  or  any  support  built  in  connection  with  the 
tipple  structure,  of  at  least  18  inches. 

That  no  support  should  be  placed  between  railroad  tracks  passing 
under  a tipple  structure  except  between  the  two  outside  tracks,  namely, 
the  usual  dump  track  and  the  one  adjacent,  except  where  the  requirements 
make  it  absolutely  necessary  to  insert  supports  between  other  tracks. 

That  the  clearance  between  cars  on  tracks  where  no  supports  are 
inserted  should  not  be  less  than  2 ft. 

Referring  to  the  vertical  clearance  above  railroad  cars  passing  under 
tipple  structure,  it  has  been  difficult  for  your  Committee  to  reach  a satis- 
factory conclusion  on  account  of  the  varying  heights  of  railroad  equip- 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


37 


ment,  and  especially  due  to  the  fact  that  certain  railroads  have  regula- 
tions regarding  the  passing  of  engines  under  tipple  structures.  How- 
ever, your  Committee  recommends  that  this  matter  be  taken  up  for  dis- 
cussion at  our  coming  Standardization  Conference,  with  the  object  of 
trying  to  secure  suggestions  from  our  members  which  your  Committee 
will  then  take  under  further  consideration. 

We  believe  that  this  question  of  railroad  clearances  under  tipple  struc- 
tures is  of  sufficient  importance  to  warrant  its  most  careful  considera- 
tion with  the  ultimate  object  of  trying  to  secure  more  uniform  and  safer 
practice. 

To  secure  these  results  it  may  be  necessary,  after  definite  conclusions 
have  been  reached — which  are  satisfactory  to  the  more  progressive  ele- 
ment in  the  industry — to  enforce  safe  requirements  regarding  clearances 
by  State  legislation  in  respective  districts  where  this  may  be  required. 

Clearances  for  Over-Wind 

A study  of  present  practice  indicates  that  there  is  not  sufficient  im- 
portance given  to  providing  adequate  distance  between  the  point  of 
dump  in  tipples,  and  the  first  obstruction  in  the  tipple  above  the  point 
of  dump. 

When  slow-speed  hoists  were  in  general  use,  so  much  importance  did 
not  attach  to  the  question  of  proper  clearance  for  over-wind.  However, 
even  in  the  past,  properly  designed  tipples  always  provided  a few  feet  of 
clearance  above  the  highest  point  reached  by  the  cage  when  dumping, 
and  the  nearest  obstruction  in  the  tipple  or  head-frame  above. 

With  the  present  extensive  use  of  high-speed  electric  hoists,  this  mat- 
ter of  clearance  for  over-wind  becomes  an  important  one,  and  a safe 
clearance  should  always  be  provided,  taking  into  account  the  speed  of 
the  cage  when  entering  the  dumping  horns,  and  also  considering  all 
devices  to  be  installed  both  in  the  tipple  or  on  the  hoist  to  prevent  over- 
winding. 

Your  Committee  has  not  reached  definite  conclusions  in  this  matter, 
and  therefore  wishes  to  refer  it  to  the  Conference  for  further  discussion 
and  suggestions. 

It  also  seems  reasonable  that  automatic  stops  should  be  provided  to 
prevent  or  control  over-wind  in  high-speed  electric  hoists. 

Your  Committee  would  be  pleased  to  have  this  question  discussed  and 
to  receive  your  suggestions. 

Fire  Protection 

There  is  a great  lack  of  uniformity  and  safe  practice  as  regards  the 
building  of  structures  over  or  near  mine  openings.  Certain  States  have 
laws  requiring  that  only  fireproof  structures  may  be  built  over  or  within 
a certain  specified  distance  of  any  mine  opening.  In  other  States,  where 
such  legal  requirements  do  not  make  it  necessary,  unsafe  practice  largely 
prevails. 


IEPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


38 


Your  Committee  therefore  recommends  that  good  and  safe  practice,  as 
provided  for  by  the  mining  laws  of  certain  States,  regarding  fireproof 
structures  over  or  near  mine  openings,  should  be  adopted,  and  an  effort 
made  to  have  such  practice  adopted  in  other  States. 

Even  in  the  States  where  laws  have  been  passed  for  such  protection, 
the  laws  are  not  always  sufficiently  definite  and  controversy  arises  be- 
tween the  State  Mining  Board  and  operators  who  wish  to  economize. 

We  believe  that  a careful  study  should  be  made  of  the  requirements  in 
States  having  such  protective  laws,  with  the  object  of  recommending  to 
the  State  Mining  Boards  what  we  would  consider  good  and  safe  practice. 
AVe  fully  believe  that  these  Boards  would  welcome  such  suggestions  and 
recommendations  from  our  Congress. 

We  further  believe  that  a careful  study  of  the  ultimate  economy  secured 
by  providing  fireproof  structures  over  and  adjacent  to  mine  openings 
would  fully  warrant  the  expenditure  necessary  to  secure  such  protection. 
Frequent  fires  at  coal  mines,  at  the  most  inopportune  time,  when  produc- 
tion is  required,  indicate  that  a reasonable  expenditure  to  prevent  such 
fires,  is  an  evident  economy  in  the  life  and  operation  of  a mine. 

It  would  seem  that  only  persistent  education  carried  on  through  such 
agencies  as  our  Congress,  and  other  organizations  of  like  purpose,  is 
necessary  to  secure  these  beneficial  results. 

Standardization  of  Merchandizing  Machinery 

It  would  seem  to  your  Committee,  after  careful  consideration  of  the 
matter,  that  considerable  standardization  could  be  accomplished  in  cer- 
tain standard  equipment  and  machinery  as  now  provided  by  manufac- 
turers of  such  machinery. 

In  making  this  suggestion  it  is  not  contemplated  that  requests  should 
be  made  on  manufacturers  to  produce  uniform  machinery  for  certain 
purposes,  but  only  to  provide  such  machinery  with  as  nearly  as  possible 
standard  and  uniform  connecting  parts. 

We  believe  that  the  manufacturers  will  co-operate  with  us  in  our 
endeavor  to  standardize  such  parts,  and  thereby  obviate  the  great  diver- 
sity of  such  connections  as  now  appear  on  machinery  made  for  the  same 
purpose. 

Your  Committee  therefore  recommends  that  this  matter  be  fully  dis- 
cussed, and  that  special  inquiries  should  be  made  from  the  manufac- 
turers’ representatives  present  at  our  Standardization  Conference,  to 
obtain  their  views,  and  if  possible,  their  co-operation  in  securing  the 
beneficial  results  from  the  operators’  viewpoint  from  such  standardiza- 
tion. 

Cages,  Skips,  and  Dumps 

We  believe  that  a careful  study  of  the  cages  and  skips  used  for  hoist- 
ing men,  coal,  and  materials,  will  indicate  that  there  is  opportunity  for 
a vast  improvement  in  the  safety  devices  applied  to  such  equipment.  * 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


:«) 

It  would  not  seem  feasible  to  endeavor  to  secure  the  adoption  of  any 
standards  for  such  devices,  so  far  as  their  uniformity  is  concerned,  but 
it  would  appear  practical  and  highly  beneficial  to  make  a study  of  all 
such  devices  with  the  object  of  adopting  and  recommending  those  which 
would  comply  with  good,  safe  practice  for  the  various  equipment  to  which 
they  would  apply,  and  to  endeavor  to  secure  the  adoption  of  better  and 
safer  devices  on  such  equipment  as  now  marketed  and  which  is  not 
provided  with  safe  appliances.  Your  Committee  therefore  recommends 
a more  careful  and  extended  study  of  this  subject. 

We  believe  that  there  is  so  much  room  for  general  improvement  in 
present  day  practice,  especially  among  the  lines  that  we  have  mentioned 
above,  that  little  opposition  would  be  encountered  from  the  industry  in 
securing  the  adoption  of  our  recommendations  if  we  will  keep  them 
within  conservative  lines. 

We  also  believe  that  having  secured  the  adoption  of  certain  improved 
practices  and  standards  by  the  industry,  that  it  will  naturally  follow 
that  further  improvement  and  standardization  can  be  recommended,  and 
will  also  be  adopted.  This  process  of  education  and  improvement  go  hand 
in  hand,  and  is  a line  along  which  all  progress  is  made  in  any  industry. 


Following  is  a brief  of  the  discussion  of  the  Report  of  the  Sub- 
Committee  on  Outside  Coal-Handling  Equipment  by  the  Chairman 
of  the  General  Committee: 

Discussion  of  Sub-Committee’s  Report 

Mr.  Wilson  stated  that  he  was  greatly  impressed  with  the  valuable 
contributions  in  this  report,  especially  those  relating  to  safety,  and  sug- 
gested that  the  discusion  be  taken  up  in  the  order  of  the  recommenda- 
tions made  by  the  Sub-Committee. 

Mr.  Scholz,  acting-chairman  of  the  Conference,  stated  that  the  first 
recommendation  of  the  Sub-Committee  referred  to  clearances  for  railroad 
cars  under  tipple  structures,  and  that  the  Committee  made  definite  recom- 
mendations regarding  horizontal  clearances,  but  had  found  it  difficult  to 
decide  on  the  vertical  clearance  due  to  the  varying  height  of  railroad  cars. 

In  this  connection  Mr.  Scholz  stated  that  the  Virginian  Railway  was 
using  120-ton  coal  cars,  which  he  believed  were  10  ft.  6 in.  high,  while  the 
Western  roads  used  not  only  smaller  cars,  but  cars  of  much  less  height 
for  the  reason  that  they  were  of  the  gondola  type. 

Mr.  Needham  did  not  believe  it  practical  to  recommend  a standard  ver- 
tical clearance,  on  account  of  the  great  diversity  in  the  height  of  railroad 
cars. 

Mr.  Wilson  spoke  at  considerable  length  regarding  the  necessity  for 
providing  proper  vertical  clearance  above  loading  platforms,  and  advised 
*bat  certain  Workmen’s  Compensation  Acts  require  insurance  men  to  de- 


40 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


termine  certain  standards  of  safety  in  this  connection,  and  he  asked 
the  co-operation  of  the  American  Mining  Congress  and  others  in  this 
direction. 

Highest  Railroad  Cars  Determine  Clearance  of  Tipples 

Mr.  Kiser  suggested  that  his  understanding  of  vertical  clearance  would 
be  the  difference  between  the  fixed  tipple  structure  and  the  highest  rail- 
road cars  that  would  visit  a particular  mine. 

The  Chairman  of  your  Committee,  in  reviewing  this  discussion,  agrees 
with  the  latter  conclusion,  and  believes  it  possible  to  recommend  and 
adopt  a minimum  vertical  clearance  which  it  would  be  assumed  should  be 
the  clearance,  as  Mr.  Kiser  suggests,  above  the  highest  railroad  cars  de- 
livered to  any  particular  mine. 

Regarding  the  horizontal  clearance,  Mr.  Wilson  stated  that  he  thought 
the  recommendations  of  the  Committee,  namely,  a minimum  of  18  in. 
between  any  support  under  the  tipple  structure,  and  the  widest  railroad 
cars  passing  under  such  structure  was  insufficient,  and  it  should  be  at 
least  20  inches.  There  seemed  to  be  no  adverse  opinion  to  this  suggestion 
and  the  Sub-Committee  will  therefore  accept  this  recommendation. 

Mr.  Scholz  stated  that  the  next  question  for  discussion  in  this  Sub- 
committee’s report  was  ‘clearance  for  over-wind.’  He  stated  that  this 
was  an  important  matter,  due  to  the  adoption  of  high-speed  hoists,  es- 
pecially at  large  mines,  where  the  cages  or  skips  were  likewise  of  a heavy 
type,  and  for  this  reason  a much  larger  clearance  was  required  for  safety 
than  at  mines  where  slow-speed  hoists  and  lighter  equipment  were  used. 

Mr.  Bright  advised  that  he  had  visited  mines  where  there  was  practi- 
cally no  clearance  for  over-wind  allowed,  or  at  best  only  a foot  or  two, 
which  he  considered  a dangerous  condition.  He  therefore  considered  it 
important  that  some  reasonable  safe  clearance  for  over-wind  should  be 
agreed  upon. 

Mr.  Larson  was  of  the  opinion  that  even  with  adequate  clearance  for 
over-wind  safety  would  not  be  attained  without  the  use  of  proper  safety 
devices  for  slowing  down,  and  for  preventing  over-wind. 

Mr.  Kiser  suggested  that  such  devices  for  slowing  down  and  preventing 
over-wind  were  difficult  to  apply  where  the  tonnage  required  at  a mine 
was  greatly  taxing  the  hoisting  equipment. 

Summing  up  this  discussion,  your  Committee  believes  that  a reasonable 
minimum  clearance  for  over-wind  of  at  least  10  or  12  ft.  is  advisable,  and 
will  be  an  additional  feature  of  safety  notwithstanding  any  other  safety 
devices  that  may  be  applied. 

Mr.  Scholz  stated  that  the  next  subject  recommended  by  the  Committee 
for  consideration  was  fire  protection: 

Fire-Resistant  a Better  Term  Than  Fireproof 

Mr.  Wilson  believed  that  real  fireproofing  is  a very  much  over-worked 
phrase,  and  is  very  badly  applied  in  general.  He  hat  a great  deal  of 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


41 


experience  in  this  connection  while  in  conferences  with  the  National  Fire 
Protection  Association,  and  he  advised  that  practically  nothing  in  the  way 
of  building  construction  is  fireproof,  and  therefore  suggests  that  we  would 
better  use  the  term  ‘fire-resistant’  and  ‘slow-burning’  for  another  grade 
of  construction.  He  believed  that  this  important  subject  needed  furthe 
consideration,  and  that  it  would  be  well  to  appoint  a Sub-Committee  from 
this  Committee  to  make  a careful  study  of  this  whole  subject  of  fire 
protection  for  mine  shafts,  slopes,  and  mine  bottoms. 

There  was  considerable  discussion  of  this  subject,  and  it  seemed  to  be 
the  consensus  of  opinion  that  several  .types  of  construction  being  used  to 
fulfill  the  requirements  of  mine  laws  for  fireproof  construction  did  not 
always  answer  this  requirement,  especially  after  such  construction  had 
been  installed  for  some  time,  and  might  be  damaged  by  accident  or 
otherwise. 

Your  Committee  therefore  would  sum  up  this  discussion  with  the  con- 
clusion that  no  construction  is  fireproof  if  it  is  made  up  of  combustible 
material,  even  though  such  material  may  be  covered  with  a layer  of  fire- 
proofing, or  fire-resisting  material. 

Your  Committee  also  agrees  with  the  suggestion  that  this  is  a subject 
of  sufficient  importance  to  deserve  the  further  consideration  of  a special 
committee,  which  would  make  a thorough  study  of  the  subject  and  report 
back  to  this  Committee. 

Mr.  Scholz  stated  that  the  next  subject  presented  by  the  Committee  for 
consideration  was  standardizing  machinery. 

The  discussion  of  this  topic  seemed  to  be  wide  of  the  mark,  and  your 
Committee  can  only  hope  that  on  publication  of  the  work,  more  careful 
consideration  will  be  given  to  the  recommendation  by  the  Committee  re- 
garding standardization  of  certain  parts  of  more  or  less  standardized 
equipment  and  machinery. 

Mr.  Scholz  stated  that  the  last  subject  submitted  by  the  Committee  for 
consideration  was  cages,  skips  and  dumps,  a subject  on  which  he  could 
spend  a whole  day  and  then  have  much  left  to  say.  No  further  discussion 
was  offered  on  the  recommendations  of  the  Committee  that  certain  mini- 
mum requirements  for  safety  should  be  recommended  and  adopted  for 
cages,  skips,  and  dumps. 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  If  there  is  no  further  discussion,  we  will  pass  to  the 
next  paper,  which  is  the  report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Underground 
Transportation,  of  which  Mr.  Watts  is  chairman. 


42 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


Following  is  the  Report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Standardiza- 
tion of  Underground  Transportation: 

The  adoption  of  standards  is  a matter  of  education  and  leads  to  safe 
and  economical  production  and  operation  for  both  manufacturer  and  con- 
sumer of  such  apparatus  and  equipment  as  falls  within  the  influence  of 
its  prescribed  subjects.  While  we  understand  that  this  Committee  was 
authorized  to  recommend  standards  covering  transportation  problems  of 
underground  mine  operation,  yet  we  believe  in  view  of  the  experience  of 
other  organizations  and  associations  similarly  engaged  in  attempts  to 
standardize  certain  matters  in  connection  with  their  work,  that  better 
results  will  be  obtained  if  at  present  we  were  to  suggest  a number  of 
practices  that  would  be  known  as  ‘Recommended  Practices’  rather  than 
iron  bound  or  fixed  standards.  We  feel  that  when  a standard  of  anything 
is  adopted,  it  should  be  one  that  all  of  the  members  of  any  association 
could  and  would  subscribe  to. 

The  Sub-Committee  undertakes  to  submit  for  the  General  Committee’s 
consideration  Recommended  Practices  on  the  following:  (1)  track  gage; 
(2)  minimum  track  curvature;  (3)  wheel-base — coal  mine-cars;  and  (4) 
maximum  outside  length  of  car-body;  and,  in  addition  to  these,  to  outline 
the  work  in  connection  with  details  of  car  construction,  which  it  has  in 
view  for  early  attention. 

Track  Gage  (Recommended  practice,  42  inches) 

It  is  well  recognized  by  the  Committee  that  at  the  present  time  track 
gages  vary  by  almost  inches  from  24  to  48  in.  with  standard-gage  track 
occasionally  in  use.  They  recognize  also  that  36,  42,  44,  and  4S-in.  gage 
tracks  predominate,  and  we  have  ascertained  that  in  installations  re- 
cently made  and  contemplated,  about  80%  of  the  track  to  be  installed  is 
of  42-in.  gage.  The  Committee  realizes  the  actual  necessity  of  making  one 
gage  of  track  as  a Recommended  Practice  if  we  are  ever  to  accomplish 
anything  in  the  way  of  standards.  We  realize  that  mine  developments 
are  becoming  larger,  heavier  cars  are  being  used,  larger  locomotives  are 
required,  higher  speeds  are  necessary,  all  of  which  tends  to  economy,  and 
after  material  deliberation  we  have  decided  to  make  the  definite  recom- 
mendation for  a 42-in.  gage  track,  because  on  this  gage  can  be  con- 
structed a standard  car  which  is  capable  of  containing  any  tonnage  from 
1 to  5 tons  of  coal. 

Minimum  Track  Curvature 

Recommended  Practice — for  rooms,  not  main  haulage.  28  ft.  radius 
based  on  No.  2 track-frog,  having  an  angle  of  28°  04'.  Having  recom- 
mended a definite  track  gage  the  Committee  feels  the  necessity  of  recom- 
mending a minimum  curvature  of  track.  After  giving  this  subject  much 
consideration,  and  consulting  with  the  manufacturers  of  track,  we  find 
that  most  consistent  minimum  curvature  that  could  be  established  would 
be  that  of  a 28-ft.  radius,  which  is  based  on  the  use  of  a No.  2 track-frog 
having  an  angle  of  28°  04'.  The  Committee  realizes  that  this  is  seem- 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


4 ;j 


ingly  a large  step  in  track  construction.  It  has  considered  that  there 
will  probably  be  a little  increase  in  cost  in  the  initial  laying  of  track 
with  this  curvature.  We  have,  however,  considered  its  relation  to  the 
42-in.  gage  of  track,  and  to  the  capacity  of  cars  that  must  be  hauled 
around  the  curves.  There  is,  as  all  engineers  realize,  a direct  relation 
between  track-gage  curvature  and  wheel-base  of  cars  which  will  permit 
economy  in  operation  of  equipment,  economy  in  track  repairs,  and  a 
distinct  lessening  in  car  derailments,  which  are  in  themselves  economies. 

Wheel-Base  of  Coal  Mine-Cars  (Recommended  Practice,  Minimum  42 
inches) 

The  Committee  makes  this  direct  recommendation,  because  there  is  a 
distinct  relation,  that  must  be  adhered  to,  between  track  gage,  curvature, 
and  wheel-base.  A wheel-base  equal  to  track  gage  is  (1)  theoretically 
correct  and  practically  permissible;  (2)  it  eliminates  derailment;  (3) 
increases  speed;  (4)  lengthens  the  life  of  cars  in  service;  (5)  future 
operations  tends  to  higher  speed  and  larger  capacity  cars;  and  (6)  while 
this  is  a radical  departure  from  present  practice  since  the  early  establish- 
ment of  26-in.  wheel-base,  it  is  realized  that  these  short  wheel-bases  are 
fast  passing  from  mines.  New  features,  such  as  mechanically-handled 
cars  at  the  face  of  rooms,  the  necessity  of  reducing  the  cost  of  operation, 
all  tending  towards  the  use  of  the  larger  car,  which  in  turn  necessitates 
the  longer  wheel-base. 

Overall  Length  of  Car-Body  (Recommended  Practice) 

The  maximum  outside  length  of  coal  mine-car  body  measured  over 
sills — not  bumpers — shall  be  126  in.  In  an  endeavor  to  establish  a fixed 
relation  between  the  wheel-base  and  the  length  of  the  car-body,  due  con- 
sideration has  been  given  to  the  results  observed  in  deteriorating  effects 
of  mine-cars  in  service.  It  is  generally  considered  that  one  of  the  prin- 
cipal channels  of  deterioration  of  coal  mine-cars  comes  through  the  bend- 
ing of  the  car-body  bottom  over  the  axles  when  the  centers  of  axles  are 
too  close  together.  This  results  in  the  early  destruction  of  the  car,  and 
therefore  means  a heavy  repair  expense  because  of  this  short  wheel-base. 
Therefore  it  was  unanimously  agreed  that  the  over-hang  of  a car-body 
should  not  exceed  one-third  of  its  total  length.  This  in  turn  means  that 
the  maximum  car-body  length  will  be  three  times  the  wheel-base,  and 
since  the  wheel-base  has  been  fixed  at  42  in.,  it  is  better  to  state  this 
length  of  car-body  in  fixed  terms  of  inches  rather  than  relating  it  in  any 
way  to  the  wheel-base. 

Couplers  and  Height  of  Coupler  Center 

The  Committee  discussed  the  advisability  of  recommending  practices 
for  couplers  and  the  height  of  coupler  centers.  The  discussion  developed 
that  the  Federal  Government  had  already  thoroughly  cared  for  the  subject 
of  safety  appliances  for  railways  through  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission, and  that  it  was  possible  in  the  future  that  the  Government  might 
establish  more  or  less  safety  appliance  standards  for  mine  equipment,  so 
it  might  be  well  if  the  Ai"  nrican  Mining  Congress  could  anticipate  anv 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


44 


action  that  the  Government  might  take  regarding  safety  rules  in  mine-car 
equipment.  It  was  therefore  recommended  by  this  Sub-Committee  that 
an  automatic  coupler  should  be  considered,  also  that  the  height  of  center 
of  couplers,  based  on  16-in.  wheels,  shall  be  10  in.  above  rails.  A varia- 
tion 1 in.  above  and  1 in.  below  will  be  allowed  to  accommodate  18  and 
14  in.  wheels,  respectively.  This  provides  for  placing  the  drawbar  under 
the  car-floor  instead  of  above,  as  is  the  present  general  practice. 

These  subjects  will  be  considered,  and  final  recommendations  made  by 
this  Sub-Committee  at  an  early  date.  There  are  many  items  involved 
when  considering  the  height  of  coupler  center  before  a standard  truck 
can  be  decided  upon,  such  as  wheel  diameters,  thickness  and  height  of 
flanges,  size  of  axles,  size  of  boxes,  etc.  These  points  should  be  considered 
and  established  in  conjunction  with  the  question  of  type  of  coupler  and 
height  of  coupler  center. 

Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  (Recommended  Practice) 

This  organization,  which  is  an  association  of  industrial  car  builders, 
having  already  established  certain  Recommended  Practices  bearing  on 
the  practical  as  well  as  theoretical  construction  of  coal  mine-cars,  has 
given  our  Sub-Con^mittee  a memorandum  of  its  Recommended  Practices 
that  have  so  far  been  adopted.  It  is  our  understanding  that  these  prac- 
tices will  be  enlarged  upon  from  time  to  time,  and  will  include  recom- 
mendations covering  practices  for  treads  and  flanges  of  wheels,  weights 
of  wheels  for  carrying  capacity  of  cars,  diameter  for  axles,  and  journal 
bearings,  types  of  couplers,  and  so  forth. 

As  the  time  Of  this  Sub-Committee  has  been  occupied  by  the  disposal  of 
the  above  definite  recommendations,  the  practices  of  the  Industrial  Car 
Manufacturers’  Institute  have  not  been  discussed  in  detail  at  any  of  our 
meetings,  but  they  will  be  carefully  considered  by  the  Members  of  the 
Sub-Committee,  with  the  idea  of  discussing  them  at  the  next  meeting. 
For  the  information  of  members  of  the  American  Mining  Congress,  a copy 
of  the  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute’s  ‘Recommended  Practices’ 
for  mine-car  construction  is  attached  to  this  report. 

DATA  ON  COAL-MINE  CARS 

Bolts 

In  construction,  bolts  of  and  %-in.  diameter  only  are  to  be  used,  and 
lengths  shall  not  vary  in.  multiples  of  less  than  % inch. 

Capacity 

Weights  of  coal  to  be  used  in  computing  size  of  car-bodies: 

Cubic  Feet  per  Pounds  per 


Coals^  ton  of  2.000  lb.  cubic  foot. 

Gas  42  47.6 

Low  volatile 35  57.1 

Anthracite  35  57.1 


Car-Bodies  (Widths) 

The  outside  width  of  car-body  bottoms  (measured  inside  of  belt  shall 
be  6 in.  less  than  track  gage. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


45 


Factor  of  Safety 

For  running  gear  and  under-frame  a factor  of  safety  of  not  less  than 
four  to  be  used. 

Irons  (Square  and  Round) 

Square  and  round  iron  will  be  limited  to  sizes  varying  not  less  than 
ys  in.  thickness  or  diameter. 

Irons  (Car-Body) 

All  kinds  of  flat  irons,  including  binders,  belt  braces,  and  braces,  ver- 
tical braces,  box  braces,  drawbars,  etc.,  shall  be  made  in  sizes  varying  not 
less  than  ^ in.  width,  nor  y8  in.  thickness. 


Lumber  Sizes 

Where  specifications  and  prints  do  not  definitely  state  the  requirement, 
it  should  be  considered  that  sizes  given  are  for  sawed  material. 

If  finished  material  is  called  for,  it  is  recommended  that  material  fur- 
nished shall  be  of  the  nearest  standard  finished  size  to  that  called  for. 

Rating 

To  determine  size  of  bodies,  to  be  water-level  full  with  top  of  sides.’ 


Questionnaire  for  Coal  Mine-Cars 

(This  form  approved  by  the  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute.) 


Questionnaire  No 

Capacity 

Bushels 
Gage  of  Track 


Date 


Wheel-Base 


Cubic  feet 

Size  of  Axles. 


Wheels 

Length 


Height 

Brake 

Brake  Lever 
Handle 

Bumpers 


Diameter Style Size  of  journal 

Inside  of  car 

Center  line  coupling  link 

Over  bumpers 

Car  side  above  rail 

Rear  end  above  bottom 

Is  brake  wanted? Style 

Single  or  double 


On  which  side  standing  at  rear  of  car? 

Does  it  pull  to  right  or  left? 

Show  rough  outline  on  sketch  on  back  of  sheet. 

Style 

Diameter  of  holes — Top 


Door-Latch 


Style 


Bottom 

On  which  side  standing  at  rear? 


40 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


Drawbar 

Type 

Size  of  coupling  holes 

End  Gate,  If  Required 


Hitching,  if  required: 


Lift  or  swing  type 

! (Describe) 


Make  sketch 


Track  Curvature 


In  order  that  cars  will  operate  most  satisfactory  in  ore  and  coal  mines, 


the  following  information  for  elevating  the  outside  rail  of  track  on  curve. 

which  is  considered  general  good  practice,  is 

given  to  members  to  be  used 

when  they  are  called 

upon 

to  suggest  types 

of  track  construction.  This 

information  is  taken 

from 

the  ‘Coal  Miners’ 

Pocket  Book.’ 

Degree  of 

Radius  of 

Elevation  of  outer 

curve. 

curve,  feet. 

rail,  inches. 

1 

5,729.6 

% 

2 

2,864.9 

-4 

3 

1,910.1 

4 

1,432.7 

Vl6 

5 

1,146.3 

6 

955.4 

13/l6 

7 

819.0 

33/l6 

8 

716.8 

% 

9 

637.3 

1 

10.0 

573.7 

1 V8 

12.0 

478.3 

Ww 

15.0 

383.1 

1% 

18.0 

319.6 

20.0 

287.9 

2%6 

60.0 

100.0 

414 

112.9 

60.0 

41/2 

. 180.0 

50.0 

414 

It  is  not  generally  advisable  to  elevate  the  rail  more  than  4*4  in.,  as  it 
is  not  good  practice  to  attempt  to  run  trips  around  sharp  curves  at  a high 
speed.  The  rule  for  standard-gage  roads  (4  ft.  8 y2  in.)  on  surface  and  for 
speeds  of  25  to  35  miles  per  hour,  is  to  elevate  the  outer  rail  14  in.  for 
each  degree  of  curvature.  An  approximate  rule  often  given  for  narrower 
gages  is  to  make  the  elevation  proportional  to  the  gage  based  on  the 
amount  given  for  standard  gage.  Thus,  for  a 36-in.  gage,  the  elevation 
would  be  about  two-thirds  of  the  elevation  for  a 56%-in.  gage  for  the  same 
speed  and  curve. 

The  elevations  of  the  outer  rail  given  in  the  table  correspond  to  the 
middle  ordinates  of  the  respective  curves  for  a chord  of  20  ft.  Hence,  a 
common  rule  to  determine  the  amount  of  the  elevation  of  the  outer  rail, 
for  a speed  of  15  miles  per  hour  for  a 3-ft.  gage,  is  to  measure  the  middle 
ordinate  of  a string  20  ft.  long,  stretched  as  a chord  on  the  gage-line  of  the 
outer  rail.  For  higher  or  lower  speeds,  make  the  length  of  the  string 
proportional  to  the  speed;  thus,  for  a speed  of  12  miles  per  hour  use  a 
16-ft.  string;  for  9 miles  per  hour  a 12-ft.  string,  etc.  Also  the  elevation 
should  be  proportional  to  the  gage;  thus,  for  a 30-in.  gage,  use  five-sixth > 
of  the  above  elevation,  etc. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


47 


The  general  rule  is  to  begin  to  elevate  the  rail  a short  distance  before 
the  curve  begins,  this  distance  depending  on  the  amount  required.  It  is, 
however,  not  always  practicable  to  do  this  in  mine  work. 

Track  Gage 

For  new  track  construction  and  for  use  of  equipment  wherever  possible, 
the  36,  42,  48  and  56%in.  (4  ft.  8%  in.  railroad  standard). 

Wheel-Base  (Length  of) 

Wheel-base  variations  to  be  between  24  in.  minimum  and  40  in.  maxi- 
mum, and  the  variations  be  not  less  than  2 in.  or  multiples  of  2 inches. 

The  following  whpel-base  computation  should  be  followed:  The  radius 
of  curves  over  which  cars  must  travel,  given  in  feet,  when  multiplied  by 
two,  gives  most  desirable  wheel-base  in  inches. 

Wheel  Diameters 

Wheels  of  the  following  diameters  only  to  be  used:  14,  16  and  18 
inches. 

Wheel  Mounting 

In  mounting  wheels  on  axles,  the  wheel  gage,  which  should  be  measured 
from  throat  of  flange  to  throat  of  flange  on  opposite  wheel,  should  be 
y2  in.  less  than  track  gage. 


Following  is  the  address  delivered  to  Joint  Sections  of  Metal  and 
Coal  Mining  Standardization  Sections  of  the  American  Mining 
Congress,  by  James  Milliken  president  of  the  Industrial  Car  Manu- 
facturers’ Institute. 

At  the  request  of  Colonel  Warren  R.  Roberts,  chairman  of  the  Standard- 
ization Committee,  Coal  Mining  Section,  of  the  Ajnerican  Mining  Con- 
gress, I prepared  a paper  to  be  read  before  this  Congress.  Since  attending 
several  of  the  Standardization  Committees’  conferences  I have  been  im- 
pressed with  the  necessity  of  our  doing  a number  of  things  in  a consecu- 
tive order,  so  that  the  standardization  of  mining  equipment  may  become 
an  established  fact.  If  you  will  bear  with  me  for  a few  moments  I want 
to  emphasize  a number  of  necessities  of  the  case. 

Standardization  Means  Economies  and  Efficiency 

You  appreciate  the  real  value  of  standardization.  It  means  economies 
and  efficiency.  In  order  that  standards  may  be  actually  realized,  it  is 
first  necessary  that  we  convince  the  mine  operators  that  the  proposed 
standards  are  correct,  and  that  real  economies  will  result.  In  order  to  do 
that,  in  the  first  place  your  several  Committees  must  make  the  same 
recommendations.  Unless  this  is  done,  no  real  standards  can  be  set.  This 
is,  I believe,  the  first  real  Standardization  Congress  that  has  been  held, 


48 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


or  in  which  real  reports  have  been  presented,  and  it  will  be  noted  that 
some  of  the  Sub-Committees’  reports  are  not  in  line  with  each  other.  I 
want,  therefore,  to  suggest  the  necessity  of  having  all  individual  Com- 
mittee’s or  Sub-Committees’  reports  considered  by  a General  Committee 
before  being  presented  to  the  Congress,  in  order  that  single  definite 
recommendations  can  be  made. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  make  recommendations  for  standard  practices,  but 
it  is  going  to  be  hard  to  convince  all  of  the  members  of  this  organization 
that  the  standards  recommended  are  correct,  and  will  result  in  economies. 
It  is  one  thing  to  make  standard  practices,  and  another  to  get  members 
to  agree  to  follow  them,  and  unless  this  is  done  there  is  no  value  in  estab- 
lishing standard  practices.  It  has  been  the  experience  of  a large  number 
of  associations  that  the  best  way  to  educate  men  to  thfe  use  of  standards  is 
to  introduce  theme  as  recommended  practices.  This  has  two  advantages: 
The  practice  is  not  compulsory  until  it  is  proved  correct.  When  once  the 
correctness  of  a principal  is  established  and  understood,  there  will  be  no 
difficulty  in  getting  members  to  subscribe  to  it.  It  is,  therefore,  earnestly 
recommended  that  all  of  the  suggested  standards  be  adopted  first  as  Rec- 
ommended Practices,  and  in  order  that  you  may  know  that  members  are 
willing  to  agree  to  follow  them,  it  is  further  recommended  that  each 
Practice  be  submitted  to  each  member  in  the  form  of  a letter  ballot.  If 
your  Recommended  Practices  are  correct,  your  ballots  will  all  be  voted  for, 
and  when  your  members  vote  for  them  then  will  they  be  willing  to  agree 
to  them. 

Mine-Cars  Easily  Standardized 

I am  pleased  to  talk  about  the  practicability  of  standardizing  mine-car 
equipment  for  two  reasons:  (1)  because  of  my  association  with  the 
Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute;  and  (2)  because  I personally 
believe  thoroughly  in  the  economies  of  standardization. 

The  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  is  really  a get-together  as- 
sociation of  a number  of  the  manufacturers  of  industrial  cars;  to  procure 
economical  results;  promote  a spirit  of  co-operation  among  its  members; 
provide  means  for  interchange  of  views  effecting  industrial  car  building 
interests;  to  provide  means  for  discussion  of  live  topics;  to  preserve 
equitable  conditions  not  only  in  the  workshop,  but  in  selling  practices; 
and  to  standardize  designs  and  specifications  and  bring  about  a uni- 
formity in  method  of  inspection,  purchase,  etc. 

Much  of  the  work  that  has  been  accomplished  by  this  Institute  is  the 
adoption  of  Recommended  Practices  in  industrial  car  construction,  which 
will  eventually  lead  to  real  standardization  in  construction.  About  the 
details  of  that  I will  tell  you  more  a little  later.  Whenever  large  work 
is  undertaken,  or  a multiplicity  of  interests  are  combined,  standardization 
follows,  which  inevitably  results  in  many  economies.  The  Master  Car 
Builders’  Association  was  formed  about  1872,  and  a great  amount  of  work 
has  been  accomplished  by  it  in  the  way  of  standardizing  freight-car  equip- 
ment for  interchange  throughout  the  United  States.  At  the  present  time, 
practically  all  of  the  parts  of  freight-cars  requiring  extensive  renewal  or 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


JO 


repairs  are  standard  throughout  the  country  for  the  several  types  and 
capacities  of  cars.  The  result  of  this  is  that  if  a Pennsylvania  Railroad 
car  needs  a new  pair  of  wheels,  or  a new  coupler,  or  a new  journal  bear- 
ing, when  the  car  is  in  Denver  or  San  Francisco,  the  repair-men  at  that 
point  make  the  necessary  renewal  of  the  same  sizes  and  kinds  of  mate- 
rials that  are  being  used  by  the  owning  road.  It  can  be  readily  realized 
what  it  would  mean  to  keep  freight-cars  running  over  all  this  country  if 
every  railroad  had  to  keep  repair  parts  for  every  other  company’s  cars 
which  come  into  that  particular  territory.  I talk  particularly  of  cars,  be- 
cause they  seem  to  be  more  apropos  of  the  coal  mine-car  problem. 

Standard  Sizes  of  Steel  Products 

The  question  of  standardization,  however,  applies  to  practically  all 
modern  business  methods.  It  applies  to  steel  production,  and  to  the 
manufacture  of  almost  any  article  that  is  generally  used  throughout  the 
country.  Where  would  we  be  if  pipe  sizes,  fittings,  and  treads,  were  not 
standardized?  We  must  all  acknowledge  it  would  be  very  inconvenient 
if  electric-light  bulbs  were  not  standardized  throughout  the  country. 
Large  department  stores  have  their  standards;  many  order-houses  have 
theirs;  and  in  fact  in  almost  any  walk  of  life  standards  of  one  kind  or 
another  have  been  adopted  and  are  in  daily  use. 

While  the  question  of  details  for  freight-cars  has  been  generally  stand- 
ardized, for  the  construction  of  industrial  car  equipment,  particularly 
when  gages  other  than  that  of  the  standard-gage  railroads  are  considered, 
there  are  really  no  standards  at  the  present  time. 

The  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  is  composed  of  members 
who  build  industrial  cars.  This  membership  is  sub-divided  into  groups 
and  one  of  these  groups  represents  the  builders  of  coal  mine-cars.  One  of 
their  particular  desires  is  to  standardize,  just  as  far  as  possible,  mine-car 
construction,  for  their  own  economies  and  in  order  to  produce  coal  mine- 
cars  that  will  give  the  best  of  service.  At  the  present  time  there  are  many 
hundreds /of  coal  mines  in  operation  which  could  use  cars  of  exactly 
similar  design,  where  the  operating  conditions  are  practically  the  same. 
If  a standard  car  can  be  adopted  to  give  a maximum  service,  it  will  cer- 
tainly of  great  advantage  to  the  mine-car  operator,  because  he  gets  the 
best  car  that  can  be  designed,  and  because  these  cars  and  their  parts  can 
be  made  in  larger  quantities  the  cost  is  going  to  be  materially  reduced. 
At  the  present  time  there  are  scarcely  any  two  car-builders  or  any  two 
engineers  who  manufacture  or  design  the  same  type  of  a mine-car  wheel. 
There  is  certainly  one  tread,  one  flange,  and  one-weight  wheel  for  a given 
capacity  car  that  will  give  the  maximum  service.  At  the  present  time 
there  are  hardly  any  two  alike.  Some  designs  are  good;  some  designs 
are  bad;  some  wheels  are  too  light  for  the  service,  and  others  are  so 
heavy  that  unnecessary  weight  is  being  dragged  around.  This  same 
feature  applies  to  sizes  of  axles  and  journals,  sizes  and  shapes  of  belts  or 
binders,  sizes  and  heights  of  couplers,  etc.,  the  manufacturer  has  to  make 
innumerable  patterns  for  castings,  innumerable  forms  for  making  car 
irons  of  many  shapes  and  sizes.  In  order  to  supplv  demands  they  have  to 


50 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


carry  in  stock  quantities  of  these  many  different  types  and  sizes.  When 
these  parts  are  all  standardized,  and  by  that  I do  not  necessarily  mean 
simply  one  standard  for  all  kinds  of  service  and  for  all  operating  condi- 
tions, but  I do  mean  that  there  are  standards  that  can  be  produced  that 
will  meet  your  operating  conditions  and  that  will  give  you  many  and 
lasting  economies. 

Recommended  Practices  Adopted 

Up  to  the  present  time  the  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  has 
adopted  Recommended  Practices  covering  specifications  for  materials  that 
will  be  used  in  mine-car  construction;  a factor  of  safety  for  these  mate- 
lials;  they  all  compute  the  capacity  of  cars  in  the  way;  they  all  use 
the  same  weights  for  gas  coals,  low  volatile  coals,  and  anthracite  coals, 
in  computing  the  capacity  of  their  cars;  they  have  decided  upon  the 
proper  size  bolts  and  rivets,  car  irons,  etc.,  which  should  be  used  in  cars 
of  varying  capacities;  they  now  use  a standard  specification  or,  called  by 
a better  term,  a questionnaire  for  the  purchaser  of  mine-car  equipment; 
they  are  prepared  to  make  recommendations  covering  the  best  practice 
for  gage  or  track,  curvature  of  track,  wheel-base  of  cars,  wheel  diameters, 
and  so  forth. 

You  have  a Committee  on  the  Standardization  of  Underground  Trans- 
portation which  has  made  a report  to  this  Convention.  The  members  of 
the  Committee  had  a number  of  meetings,  and  have  devoted  much  time 
and  thought  to  the  question  of  standardization.  They  have  made  a few 
definite  recommendations  covering  new  installations.  Some  of  you  may 
have  been  startled  by  these  recommendations,  which  are  far-reaching. 
When,  however,  you  consider  the  real  inwardness  of  the  report  and  the 
step  that  it  is  going  to  be,  I trust  that  you  will  all  give  the  several  ques- 
tions your  mature  consideration.  When  you  do  this  I feel  sure  that  the 
recommendations  of  this  Committee  will  be  unanimously  adopted. 

For  the  Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  I can  say  that  we  will 
be  glad  to  work  along  with  your  Committees,  your  operators,  your  mine 
superintendents,  and  your  engineers,  in  the  endeavor  to  establish  stand- 
ards in  mine-car  construction,  which  will  give  to  the  operators  the  most 
efficient  and  the  most  economical  coal  mine-cars  that  can  be  produced. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


51 


Following  is  the  brief  of  discussion  on  the  Report  of  the  Sub- 
Committee  on  Underground  Transportation  by  the  Chairman  of 
the  General  Committee: 

This  Sub-Committee  was  fortunate  in  having  its  Chairman  present, 
who  read  the  report  and  offered  the  following  brief  explanation  regarding 
the  work  of  the  Committee: 

Composition  of  Committees 

Mr.  Watts  explained  that  his  Committee  was  composed  of  men  repre- 
senting the  operating  branch  of  the  industry,  consulting  mining  engineers, 
and  manufacturers,  and  that  therefore  his  Committee  was  quite  repre- 
sentative of  the  industry.  He  further  advised  that  the  Committee  had 
many  interesting  meetings,  and  he  had  discussed  at  great  length  all  the 
subjects  covered  in  the  report,  and  therefore  the  recommendations  rep- 
resented a great  deal  of  earnest  thought  on  this  subject. 

Mr.  Ebe  inquired  whether  the  Committee  in  making  the  recommenda- 
tions on  track  gages  had  taken  into  consideration  the  methods  of  mining 
by  long-wall  system  in  the  northern  fields,  and  Mr.  Watts  replied  that 
their  recommendations  were  applicable  for  that  system  of  mining. 

Mr.  Milliken  first  called  attention  to  the  fact  that  different  track  gages 
were  recommended  in  another  Sub-Committee’s  Report  than  those  in  the 
report  under  discussion,  and  in  this  connection  pointed  out  the  necessity 
for  co-ordinating  these  reports.  He  made  the  additional  suggestion  that 
instead  of  at  first  adopting  standards,  it  might  be  well  to  submit  to  the 
industry  ‘Recommended  Practices,’  and  in  this  manner  lead  up  later  to 
standards.  He  also  stated  that  he  did  not  agree  with  some  criticism  that 
had  been  offered  by  others  regarding  the  lack  of  co-operation  on  the  part 
of  manufacturers  to  improving  and  standardizing  mining  equipment,  and 
he  stated  that  the  car  manufacturers,  and  particularly  those  of  coal  mine- 
cars,  are  looking  forward  earnestly  to  an  adoption  of  recommended  prac- 
tices which  will  eventually  become  standards.  He  stated  further  that  the 
Industrial  Car  Manufacturers’  Institute  is  divided  into  groups  and  one  of 
these  groups  is  devoted  to  the  construction  of  mine-cars.  This  group  has 
done  a great  deal  of  good  work  in  the  way  of  adopting  recommended 
practices  for  a good  many  details.  Mr.  Milliken  advised  that  if  this 
Standardization  Conference  would  adopt  standards,  or  recommend  good 
practices,  the  car  manufacturers  would  be  glad  to  follow  them. 

Work  of  National  Safety  Council 

Mr.  Hall,  representing  the  National  Safety  Council,  advised  that  the 
Council  was  interested  in  the  safety  of  machinery  as  well  as  practices 
around  mines,  and  that  the  Council  had  done  a great  deal  of  good  work 
in  trying  to  promote  improved  and  safe  practice.  He  stated  that  the 
Council  felt  it  had  not  had  proper  recognition  by  not  being  given  appoint- 
ments on  the  Standardization  Committees.  He  thought  this  was  doubtless 
an  oversight,  or  based  on  the  presumption  that  the  men  in  the  National 
Safety  Council  were  too  busy  to  attend  committee  meetings. 


52 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


He  also  advised  that  the  Council  had  arranged  with  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Mines  to  secure  the  services  of  Mr.  C.  E.  Juraden,  who  would  be  detailed 
to  the  Mining  Division  of  the  Council’s  work,  and  are  ready  to  co-operate 
with  our  Standardization  Committees. 

Mr.  Kiser  closed  the  discussion  by  calling  Mr.  Hall’s  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  American  Mining  Congress  has  a special  committee  on 
Safety  Codes,  which  Committee  is  composed  of  one  member  from  each 
of  the  Sub-Committes  on  Standardization,  and  that  this  Committee  was 
appointed  with  the  intention  that  it  should  act  in  a joint  capacity  be- 
tween the  various  Sub-Committees  on  Standardization  and  the  National 
Safety  Council,  or  any  other  organization  interested,  in  this  work  of 
Standardization. 

Replying  further  to  Mr.  Hall's  suggestion  that  the  National  Safety 
Council  was  anxious  to  co-operate  in  this  work,  and  to  have  representa- 
tives on  our  Standardization  Committees,  we  have  to  advise  that  the 
Chairman  of  your  General  Committee  has  had  conferences  with  Mr.  Wil- 
liams, chief  engineer  of  the  National  Safety  Council,  on  this  subpect,  and 
advised  him  that  we  were  anxious  to  have  its  co-operation.  However,  it 
seems  that  the  pressure  of  other  matters  has  prevented  them  from  giving 
us  much  assistance  so  far.  It  is  our  earnest  desire,  however,  to  have  such 
co-operation,  and  another  effort  will  be  made  to  secure  it. 

Recommendations  Require  Consideration 

We  wish  particularly  to  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  this  Sub-Com- 
mittee gave  first  attention  to  improved  and  standard  practices,  and  that 
many  of  their  meetings  were  devoted  to  these  broader  subjects  and  that  in 
their  report  they  make  a few  recommendations  which  should  have  the 
earnest  consideration  of  the  industry. 

The  adoption  of  the  practices  recommended  by  this  Committee  in  open- 
ing up  of  new  mines,  or  the  resuscitation  of  old  mines  would  be  of  very 
great  benefit  not  only  to  the  industry  but  to  manufacturers  also. 

MR.  SCHOLZ:  We  will  now  have  the  paper  on  Ventilation  by  Mr.  W. 
,T.  Montgomery.  [He  was  not  present,  but  Mr.  Rowe  of  the  American 
Blower  Co.,  who  disagreed  wTith  most  of  it,  gave  a resume.  The  report 
has  since  been  revised  somewhat.] 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Following  is  the  Report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Standardiza- 
tion of  Mine  Ventilation,  signed  by  Mr.  Montgomery: 

As  Chairman  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Standardization  of  Mine  Ven- 
tilation equipment,  I am  pleased  to  submit  the  following  recommenda- 
tions, with  a view  of  establishing  this  important  factor  of  the  great 
mining  industry  on  a higher  plane  where  it  rightly  belongs. 

The  suggestions  as  set  forth  in  this  report  have  not  been  approved  by 
the  various  members  of  the  Sub-Committee,  but  they  were  taken  from 
letters  reecived  from  the  members  and  other  data  compiled  by  your  chair- 
man. The  general  opinion  was  expressed  that  there  is  not  much  room  to 
standardize  fans  when  they  must  be  built  to  meet  every  condition  found 
in  the  mining  field.  However,  we  believe  there  is  a large  field  before  us 
in  the  way  of  presenting  mine  ventilation  data  with  a view  of  impressing 
those  in  charge  of  this  important  work  with  the  great  necessity  of  pro- 
viding large  air-ways  and  keeping  them  free  from  obstructions  throughout 
the  life  of  the  mine.  This  report  will  deal  with  recommendations  as  to 
fan  installation,  boosters,  air-ways,  and  velocities. 

The  following  is  recommended  for  fan  installations: 

1.  That  for  all  gaseous  mines  there  should  be  an  auxiliary  fan  installed 
with  drive  complete. 

2.  That  for  all  non-gaseous  mines  at  least  an  auxiliary  drive  should  be 
provided. 

3.  That  the  driving  power  for  the  auxiliary  equipment  should  be  from 
a different  source  than  that  for  the  main  drive,  especially  so  if  electric 
drives  are  employed. 

4.  That  all  fans  be  made  fireproof.  No  combustible  material  should  be 
used  for  the  installation. 

5.  That  there  be  a maximum  outlet  velocity  into  the  open  atmosphere, 
varying  with  the  water-gauge  against  which  the  fan  is  operating. 

6.  That  there  be  a maximum  inlet  velocity  to  the  fan  varying  with  the 
water-gauge  against  which  the  fan  is  working. 

7.  That  all  fans  for  gaseous,  and  large  non-gaseous  mines  be  so  con- 
structed that  they  can  be  readily  reversed. 

8.  That  fans  should  not  be  reversed  under  any  circumstances,  unless 
conditions  inside  the  mine  are  thoroughly  known. 

10.  That  in  case  of  moderate  to  large  capacity  mines  it  is  advantageous 
to  the  operator  to  install  a permanent  fan  at  the  beginning  of  operation, 
and  that  where  the  fan  is  not  too  far  placed  from  the  boiler-house,  a 
steam-engine  drive  is  better  adapted ; this  because  it  is  more  economical 
than  an  electric  drive  and  because  the  speed  of  the  fan  is  more . easily 
regulated.  Where  electricity  is  the  power  employed  at  a mine  with  a 
large  fan,  we  recommend  a slip-ring  motor  in  preference  to  a squirrel- 
cage  type. 


54 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


11.  That  if  a temporary  fan  is  installed,  it  should  be  so  placed  that 
the  installation  of  the  permanent  fan  will  not  interfere  with  the  opera- 
tion of  the  temporary  one. 

12.  That  all  fan  installations  be  equipped  with  a regular  U-tube  water- 
gauge. 

Booster-Fans 

1.  That  they  are  recommended  for  use  in  mines  where  a section  is  so 
remote  as  to  become  insufficiently  ventilated  and  where  a permanent  fan 
on  the  outside  is  in  use,  but  we  do  not  approve  of  the  use  of  a booster 
fan  as  the  only  source  of  ventilation,  that  is  a permanent  fan  should  be 
on  the  outside. 

2.  That  the  brattice  and  booster  fan  installation  be  made  absolutely 
fireproof. 

3.  That  a by-pass  door  be  made  in  the  brattice  of  ample  size  to  permit 
sufficient  volume  to  pass  without  going  through  the  booster. 

4.  That  the  by-pass  door  should  always  swing  in  the  direction  of  the 
air  current. 

5.  That  the  moter  driving  the  booster-fan  be  provided  with  an  auto- 
matic starter. 

Air-Ways 

With  respect  to  the  air-ways,  we  believe  that  no  mine  should  be  per- 
mitted to  get  into  such  a condition  as  to  require  a water-gage  of  over  3 
inches  to  ventilate  it  properly,  and  as  a means  to  this  end  we  recommend 
the  following: 

1.  That  all  air-ways  be  driven  straight,  and  where  changes  in  direc- 
tion are  necessary,  they  be  made  by  long  radius  curves. 

2.  That  an  easement  be  provided  at  the  bottom  of  the  fan  air-shaft  to 
enable  a change  of  direction  with  a minimum  of  shock. 

3.  That  all  air-ways  be  kept  clean  and  free  from  accumulations  of 
falls,  mine-cars,  old  timbers,  etc. 

4.  That  where  overcasts  are  used,  the  air-ways  over  the  bridge  be  of 
the  same  cross-section  as  found  in  the  entries  and  that  an  easement  be 
provided  on  each  side  of  the  bridge. 

5.  That  in  the  interest  of  both  safety  and  economy  the  air  be  divided 
into  several  splits  rather  than  forced  to  travel  in  one  continuous  current. 

6.  That  all  brattices  and  stoppings  be  made  air-tight. 

7.  That  the  air  shall  not  pass  through  old  workings  to  new  workings. 

8.  That  wherever  possible  in  a mine,  air  be  brought  in  or  discharged 
from  openings  at  points  remote  from  the  fan. 

9.  That  where  labor  and  roof  conditions  permit,  the  multiple-entry 
system  be  used. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


i 


DO 

10.  That  a change  in  the  laws  governing  crosscuts  be  enacted  per- 
mitting parallel  entries  to  be  driven  200  ft.  or  more  before  a crosscut  is 
made;  the  ventilation  of  these  entries  to  be  accomplished  by  means  of 
small  auxiliary  fans  and  the  air  current  carried  to  the  face  through 
tubing. 

This  method  will  ensure  a copious  supply  at  the  face  at  all  times, 
reduce  the  cost  of  miking  numerous  cuts  and  building  stoppings,  prevent 
a vast  amount  of  air  leakage  and  short  circuiting,  and  in  turn  greatly 
reduce  the  volume  of  air  the  permanent  fan  must  handle  with  a corre- 
sponding decrease  in  power  consumption. 

11.  That  where  stoppings  are  built,  they  should  be  constructed  of 
masonry.  Piling  of  gob  material  against  masonry  stoppings  should  be 
avoided.  Stoppings  should  be  inspected  frequently. 

12.  That  the  splits  should  be  made  close  to  the  intake,  and  the  several 
branches  united  again  close  as  possible  to  the  outlet. 

13.  That  there  should  be  a free  and  unobstructed  inlet  and  outlet  for 
the  air.  Haulways  and  hoisting  shafts  offer  too  much  obstruction. 

Air  Velocities 

In  respect  to  the  velocity  of  air  currents,  the  following  is  recommended: 

1.  That  the  velocity  in  the  main  entries  shall  not  exceed  1000  ft.  per 
minute. 

2.  That  the  velocity  at  face  of  workings  shall  not  exceed  300  ft.  per 
minute. 

3.  That  the  velocity  in  the  air-shaft  or  drift  shall  not  exceed  2000  ft. 
per  minte. 

General  Conclusions 

It  is  the  opinion  of  your  Chairman  that  a system  of  educational  work 
should  be  started  relative  to  the  operation  and  duties  performed  by  mine- 
fans.  There  appears  to  be  a woeful  lack  of  data  and  knowledge  of  the 
subject.  Hundreds  of  mine-fans  are  condemned  by  their  users  as  well  as 
by  many  mine  inspectors  simply  because  the  mine  will  not  pass  the  air 
at  a reasonable  pressure.  The  fan  may  have  a normal  capacity  of  200,000 
cu.  ft.  at  3-in.  gage,  but  the  mine  capacity  is  only  100,000  cu.  ft.  at  3-in. 
gage,  hence  only  100,000  cu.  ft.  is  obtained  at  this  pressure.  The  mine 
acts  as  a regulator  on  the  fan,  therefore,  no  matter  how  large  a duty  is 
specified  for  the  fan,  only  100,000  cu.  ft.  is  obtained  at  3-in.  gage. 

It  is  a fact  that  you  find  many  large  mines  with  not  over  3 or  4 years’ 
development  offering  2-in.  pressure  for  100,000  cu.  ft.  The  main  object  of 
the  operator  is  to  get  out  a big  tonnage  and  the  air-ways  are  often  neg- 
lected. He  will  pay  a high  penalty  in  the  future  in  the  way  of  power 
bills  and  trouble  to  get  sufficient  air  to  the  face  of  the  workings.  It  is  the 
duty  of  the  mine  inspector,  and  those  in  charge  of  this  important  work, 
to  keep  a watchful  eye  on  the  mine  resistance,  and  demand  that  large 
air-ways  be  provided  and  maintained  at  all  times.  The  whole  trouble  is 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


5(3 

due  to  the  fact  that  many  operators  think  it  is  cheaper  to  purchase  a new 
fan  than  maintain  good  air-ways.  They  do  not  realize  that  the  new  fan, 
which  they  contemplate  purchasing,  cannot  produce  any  more  air  at  the 
given  pressure  than  the  old  one.  The  mine  resistance  is  a charactertistic 
of  the  mine  and  has  absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  the  fan.  The  table 
below  emphasizes  clearly  the  importance  of  maintaining  large  air-ways 
at  all  times: 

Perimeter 

Power  varies  as 

Cube  of  area 


Size  of  air-ways. 

Perimeter. 

Relative  Powers  Making 
Area.  Air-way  10  by  10  = 10  h.  p. 

10  by 

10 

40 

100 

10.0 

8 by 

8 

32 

64 

30.5 

7 by 

7 

28 

49 

59.5 

6 by 

6 

24 

36 

128.5 

5 by 

5 

20 

25 

320.0 

It  will  be  noted  from 

the  table  that 

if  it 

requires  10  h.  p.  for  an 

way  of  100  sq.  ft.,  it  will  require  about  6 times  this  amount  for  an  air-way 
one-half  this  size.  . 


Following  is  a Brief  of  the  Discussion  of  the  Report  of  Sub- 
Committee  on  Standardization  of  Mine  Ventilation  by  the  Chair- 
man of  the  General  Committee: 

The  Chairman  of  this  Sub-Committee  not  being  present,  the  report 
of  the  Committee  was  presented  by  Mr.  Rowe,  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Committee. 

From  a reading  of  the  transcript  of  the  proceedings  of  this  session  of 
the  Standardization  Conference,  it  would  appear  that  Mr.  Rowe  did  not 
read  the  report  and  then  discuss  it,  but  proceeded  to  take  exceptions  to 
the  conclusions  and  recommendations  contained  in  the  report.  We  think 
that  was  an  unfortunate  way  to  present  the  paper,  as  it  did  not  give  the 
members  of  the  Conference  an  opportunity  to  obtain  a correct  under- 
standing of  the  report  of  the  Committee,  or  even  to  understand  properly 
the  criticisms  of  the  report  made  by  Mr.  Rowe. 

Mr.  Rowe  states  that  he  understood  this  Committee  was  to  deal  with 
ventilating  apparatus,  rather  than  the  question  of  mine  ventilation, 
whereas  most  of  this  report  dealt  with  mine  ventilation,  air-ways,  etc. 
It  is  only  proper  to  state  in  this  connection  that  the  report  of  this  Com- 
mittee is  in  accordance  with  the  general  instructions  issued  to  the  Com- 
mittee, and  is  also  in  accordance  with  the  policy  adopted  by  the  General 
Committee  on  Standardization  of  mining  practice  and  equipment  at  its 
first  conference  in  St.  Louis.  While  all  Sub-Committees  have  not  always 
adhered  faithfully  to  this  recommendation  of  the  General  Committee,  it 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS  57 

lias  been  the  general  policy,  and  still  is  the  policy,  to  try  to  improve  min- 
ing practice  in  the  larger  and  broader  sense  of  the  term.  When  this 
practice  is  improved  and  made  more  uniform,  that  is  Standardization  in 
its  best  sense;  then  will  follow  standardization  of  equipment  and  machin- 
ery as  far  as  it  is  practical  to  standardize  such  equipment.  The  report 
of  this  Sub-Committee  is  not  only  in  accordance  with  the  policy  of  the 
General  Committee,  but  contains  valuable  and  constructive  suggestions, 
and  deserved  better  attention  than  it  happened  to  receive  on  account  of 
the  way  in  which  it  was  presented.  This  misfortune  seems  to  have 
prevented  any  discussion  following  by  members  of  the  conference. 

We  will  close  the  review  of  this  report  by  suggesting  that  the  Com- 
mittee should  be  organized,  as  the  Chairman  admits  that  he  has  never 
been  able  to  secure  a meeting  of  his  Committee,  and  has  had  to  prepare 
his  report  from  information  he  gained  by  correspondence  with  the 
members. 


Report  of  Sub-Committee  on  the  Standardization  of  Mine  Drain- 
age, signed  by  George  R.  Wood: 

In  regard  to  Standardization  of  Drainage  Apparatus  for  coal  mining, 
I have  written  my  Committee  members  as  to  their  views,  and  regret  to 
report  an  almost  total  lack  of  constructive  suggestions  as  to  possibility 
of  any  appreciable  measure  of  uniformity  in  design,  construction  or 
aplication  of  such  apparatus.  This  appears  to  follow  from  a belief  that 
requirements  are  specialized  to  a degree,  similar  to  ventilating  appaartus. 
I have  been  able  to  talk  personally  only  with  Mr.  Knight,  of  Kayford, 
W.  Va.,  and  the  recommendations  following  may  be  taken  therefore  as 
our  joint  position  in  the  premises: 

Safety 

All  gears  to  be  enclosed  or  completely  guarded. 

No  projecting  keys  or  set-screws  to  be  used  on  revolving  parts.  Self- 
oiling  bearings  recommended  wherever  possible. 

Enclosed  motors  preferred. 

Motors  up  to  7 y2  h.  p.,  a.  c.  or  d.  c.,  should  be  self-starting,  with  en- 
closed switch. 

For  larger  motors,  enclosed  rheostats  or  compensators  are  preferred. 

Voltage  not  exceeding  250  d.  c.,  or  220  a.  c.,  recommended  for  under- 
ground work,  except  for  large  motors  (over  150  h.  p.)  where  440  a.  c.  is 
recommended,  in  which  case,  as  with  500-volt  d.  c.  system  conduit  wiring 
is  urged. 

All  gears  to  be  enclosed  or  completely  guarded. 


58 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


Design 

In  plunger  or  piston  pumps,  the  only  stock  pumps  manufactured  ap- 
pear to  be  small  gathering  pumps,  usually  30  to  60  g.  p.  m.  capacity, 
against  varying  heads  not  exceeding  100  ft.  Each  manufacturer,  not 
unreasonably,  objects  to  any  modification  of  his  design.  We  believe, 
however,  that  we  should  recommend  that  these  pumps  should  be  built  as 
standard  for  100  ft.  head  instead  of  30,  60,  etc.  Motor  horsepower  should 
be  double  the  theoretical  horsepower  of  pump  capacity.  Pinions  should 
be  of  fiber,  leather,  or  paper  to  reduce  vibration  injurious  to  motor  wind- 
ings. We  do  not  favor  present  tendency  to  large  valve  areas  in  these 
pumps  to  reduce  friction,  since  the  power  consumption  is  usually  negli- 
gible, and  would  prefer  less  area  with  higher  velocity  and  higher  valve- 
Tift  to  ensure  passage  of  solid  particles  through  the  pumps  instead  of 
stopping  under  the  valves.  This  idea,  however,  is  at  variance  with  that 
of  most  designers,  and  needs  discussion  by  those  interested. 

Construction 

This  detail  does  not  seem  to  require  our  consideration,  for  the  reason 
that  there  are  numerous  builders  of  satisfactory,  efficient,  and  rugged 
pumping  machinery  of  all  required  types,  and  we  believe  the  (tempo- 
rarily) obsolete  law  of  supply  and  demand  will  again  function  to  elim- 
inate the  unfit. 

We  would  recommend  merging  this  Committee  with  that  on  Ventila- 
tion, as  a simplification  of  the  General  Committee  work,  and  because  of 
the  limited  field,  as  we  view  it,  for  standardization  in  pumping  or 
drainage. 


Review  of  Report  by  Sub-Committee  on  Standardization  of  Mine 
Drainage  by  the  Chairman  of  the  General  Committee 

I am  constrained  to  make  the  following  comments  on  the  Report  of 
our  Sub-Committee  on  Mine  Drainage  for  the  reason  that  I disagree 
with  the  introductory  paragraph  in  the  report  of  this  Sub-Committee. 
The  members  of  this  Committee  seerii  to  have  an  entirely  wrong  concep- 
tion as  to  their  duties.  I draw  this  conclusion  from  their  statement: 

“And  regret  to  report  an  almost  total  lack  cf  constructive  sugges- 
tions as  to  possibility  of  any  appreciable  measure  of  uniformity  in 
design,  construction,  or  application  of  such  apparatus.” 

This  statement  indicates  that  this  Committee  was  endeavoring  to 
simply  standardize  mine  pumps  instead  of  trying  to  improve  the  practice 
regarding  mine  drainage.  Anyone  who  is  familiar  with  the  drainage  of 
the  great  majority  of  coal  mines  in  this  country  will  appreciate  that  there 
is  ample  opportunity  for  such  improvement.  It  seems  to  us  that  this 
Committee  could  find  a large  field  of  usefulness  by  preparing  a construc- 
tive program  for  the  drainage  of  coal  mines.  This  program  should 
include  instructions  for  the  drainage  of  the  mine  along  modern  and 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


50 


economical  lines,  and  should  include  all  the  general  specifications  required 
for  the  proper  carrying  out  of  such  instructions.  These  specifications 
should  cover  in  general  the  drainage  equipment  required,  together  with 
the  proper  method  of  installation,  operation,  etc. 

The  efforts  which  were  already  put  forth  by  this  Committee,  as  indi- 
cated by  their  report  should  follow  such  a program  as  suggested  above, 
and  not  precede  it,  as  the  suggestions  contained  in  their  report  relate 
only  to  details  and  not  to  the  large  constructive  features  of  the  improve- 
ment in  standardization  of  mining  methods  and  equipment.  It  would 
therefore  seem  to  the  Chairman  of  your  General  Committee  that  if  this 
Sub-Committee  does  not  approve  of  the  method  of  approaching  this  work, 
as  outlined  above,  that  in  order  to  harmonize  the  work  of  this  Sub- 
committee with  that  of  the  other  sub-committees  in  the  Coal  Mining 
Branch,  thai  this  Sub  committee  should  be  reorganized  with  this  object 
in  view. 


Adjournment. 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


00 


METAL  MINING  SECTION,  STANDARDIZATION  COMMITTEE 

American  Mining  Congress 

PRELIMINARY  COMMITTEE  MEETINGS,  NOVEMBER  14,  1920 

Mr.  Chas.  A.  Mitke  presided. 

The  meeting  was  opened  by  the  Chairman  presenting  a brief  outline  of 
the  possibilities  of  standardization  in  metal  mining. 

Inasmuch  as  the  majority  of  those  present  were  interested  chiefly  in 
the  work  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  the  standardization  of  drilling  ma- 
chines and  drill-steel,  the  discussion  that  followed  was  confined  prin- 
cipally to  this  subject. 

The  question  was  raised  by  the  Chairman  as  to  whether,  if  the  work 
of  the  Committee  was  directed  towards  investigating  the  limits  of  weights 
of  the  various  types  of  machines  that  have  proved  most  satisfactory 
to  the  majority  of  users,  the  results  would  prove  of  material  benefit  both 
to  the  manufacturers  and  operators.  It  was  pointed  out  that  at  the 
present  time  there  are  a great  many  machines  of  each  type  on  the 
market — such  as  Leyners,  stopers,  and  jackhamers — with  but  slight  varia- 
tions in  weights,  the  difference  in  some  cases  not  being  more  than  a few 
pounds,  or  in  special  cases  not  more  than  a few  ounces. 

In  this  connection  some  interesting  statements  were  made.  Mr. 
Leonard,  president  of  the  Denver  Rock  Drill  Mfg.  Co.,  mentioned  that 
members  of  the  mining  profession  probably  do  not  realize  the  enormous 
amount  of  money  a company  must  spend  to  perfect  a new  machine. 

Cost  of  Placing  New  Drill  on  Market 

Mr.  Bayles,  chief  designer  of  the  Ingersoll-Rand  Co.,  remarked  that 
it  cost  the  manufacturers  $100,000  to  perfect  a new  drill  and  place  is  on 
the  market. 

From  the  discussion  which  followed,  it  appeared  that  if  the  number 
of  different  types  of  machines  could  be  reduced  to  a minimum,  it  would 
be  of  material  benefit  to  the  manufacturers  as  well  as  to  operators. 

One  of  the  difficulties  mentioned  was  the  great  variety  of  air  pressures 
available  in  the  different  mines;  also  that  certain  companies  demand  that 
machines  be  built  to  conform  to  their  own  particular  specifications.  This 
procedure  naturally  results  in  a great  variety  of  machines. 

A discussion  then  fololwed  on  the  possibilities  of  the  operators  getting 
together  and  standardizing  their  conditions;  that  is,  classifying  the 
various  kinds  of  ground  met  with  in  metal  mines,  agreeing  on  uniform 
air  pressure,  systematic  lubrication  of  machines,  etc. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


61 


It  was  repeatedly  pointed  out  that  if  hose  connections,  various  minor 
parts,  such  as  bolts,  threads,  etc.,  and  possibly,  chucks,  were  standard- 
ized, this  would  be  of  great  convenience  to  the  operator.  Not  only  could 
these  minor  parts  be  interchanged  on  the  various  makes  of  machines,  but 
if  the  chuck  of  the  jackhamer  were  made  to  correspond  with  that  of  the 
stoper,  steel  would  then  become  interchangeable. 


Meeting  of  Sub-Committee  on  Drilling*  Machines  and  Drill-Steel 

NOVEMBER  16,  1920 

The  general  chairman,  Chas.  A.  Mitke,  presided. 

MR.  MITKE:  We  are  fortunate  in  having  with  us  Mr.  Norman  Braly, 
manager  for  the  North  Butte  Mining  Co.,  who  has  done  a great  deal  of 
work  in  standardization,  and  as  the  Committee  on  Drilling  Machines  and 
Drill-Steel,  of  which  he  is  chairman,  is  just  getting  under  way,  we  would 
like  to  have  him  tell  us  something  about  the  work  that  has  been  sug- 
gested and  what  the  Committee  proposes  to  do. 

Mr.  BRALY:  I suppose  few  of  us  realize  that  there  is  no  machinery 
manufactured  in  this  country  which  penetrates  foreign  markets  as  far  as 
rock-drills.  I say  this  because  the  work  of  standardization  in  rock- 
drills  will  necessarily  be  slow,  and  it  would  be  a mistake  to  rush  into  this 
matter.  That  is  the  danger  of  standardizing  this  type  of  machinery. 

Three  Well-Known  Types  of  Drills 

During  the  last  20  years  there  have  been  three  large  drill-manufac- 
turing companies  in  this  country.  Each  one  has  carried  its  own  standard 
weight;  each  one  has  a record  of  which  it  is  proud;  and  I understand 
that  it  will  be  hard  to  get  them  to  adopt  all  the  standards.  However, 
there  are  a few  things  that  it  would  seem  to  me  they  could  do  to  benefit 
the  mine  operator  here  in  this  country.  It  is  understood  that  when  a 
mine  operator  purchases  a machine,  he  generally  strips  it  of  all  trim- 
mings, after  which  he  puts  on  standards  of  his  own,  and  send  it  under- 
ground, otherwise,  if  he  gets  it  underground  it  will  not  fit.  We  have 
asked  the  Sullivan  Machinery,  Ingersoll-Rand,  and  Denver  Rock  Drill 
companies  if  it  would  not  be  possible  for  them  to  get  together  and  create 
standard  hose  couplings  and  standard  nuts  on  the  machines,  so  that  when 
they  are  sent  underground  they  will  go  into  place.  As  it  is  now,  there 
is  a great  deal  of  lost  time  from  men  going  underground  and  having  no 
standard  wrench  to  fit  the  machines,  and  they  have  to  hunt  all  over  the 
mine  for  a new  part  or  something  of  that  kind;  and  we  believe  that  there 
are  a few  simple  things  that  can  be  taken  up  at  first  and  standardized, 
which  will  help  us  greatly. 

Each  of  these  drill  manufacturers  have  consented  to  appoint  a man  to 
a committee  upon  which  there  will  be  three  or  four  members  of  the  Sub- 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


02 

Committee  of  the  American  Mining  Congress  on  drilling  machines  and 
drill-steel.  This  inner  committee,  consisting  of  probably  eight  members, 
will  see  if  some  standards  cannot  be  worked  out;  also  the  other  members 
of  the  drilling  Committee — of  which  there  are  a large  number — will  also 
give  us  their  co-operation.  I believe  this  is  the  simplest  way  to  go 
about  it. 

Mine  Operators  Can  Not  Design  Drills 

I do  not  believe  that  the  mine  operators  themselves  are  capable  of 
designing  these  machines,  or  even  specifying  exactly  what  can  be  done 
with  them.  I think  we  will  have  to  leave  that  to  the  manufacturer.  I 
really  believe  that  if  we  leave  this  matter  to  the  manufacturers  they  will 
work  out  this  standardization,  and  in  that  way  help  the  operators. 

MR.  MITKE:  Mr.  Arthur  Notman,  who  is  one  of  the  members  of  the 
Drilling  Committee,  has  prepared  a paper  which  he  will  now  read  to  us, 
after  which  a general  discussion  will  follow. 

MR.  NOTMAN:  Perhaps  a word  of  explanation  as  to  how  we  made  this 
investigation  might  not  be  out  of  order:  Just  prior  to  the  outbreak  of  the 
war,  we  had  been  engaged  in  an  attempt  to  standardize  on  one  size  of 
steel — of  one  section — for  use  in  drifting  machines,  plungers,  and  stopers; 
but  during  the  war  we  had  to  abandon  our  experiments.  As  soon  as 
conditions  allowed,  we  started  again.  In  the  meantime  we  had  made  a 
great  deal  of  progress,  as  we  feel,  in  the  matter  of  standardizing  on 
methods  of  driving  headings.  In  the  matter  of  standard  rounds,  timber- 
ing, and  so  on,  most  of  you  who  have  seen  Mr.  Mitke’s  papers  on  those 
subjects  have  some  idea  of  what  was  done  in  that  respect  at  Bisbee. 

Having  partly  decided  upon  methods,  we  felt  the  next  step  was  to  take 
up  the  matter  of  equipment,  and  for  the  past  year  we  have  had  our  engi- 
neering office  engaged  in  this  work,  and  this  paper  has  been  prepared 
under  my  direction  by  Mr.  L.  M.  Cummings,  one  of  the  engineers  in  our 
office,  who  has  actually  been  operating  machines  himself  and  has  first- 
hand knowledge  of  the  information  included  in  the  paper. 

We  have  compiled  a good  many  tables  concerning  sizes  of  bolts,  nuts, 
pipe-threads,  and  so  forth,  which  it  would  be  hardly  worth-while  attempt- 
ing to  read,  but  I believe  arrangements  can  be  made  whereby  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Committee  and  others  who  are  interested,  may  read  the  paper 
in  printed  form  later  on. 

[Mr.  Notman’s  paper  will  be  found  on  page  729  of  the  Proceedings.] 

MR.  MITKE:  We  are  certainly  indebted  to  Mr.  Notman  for  working 
out  such  a complete  paper,  and  it  has  opened  a real  field  of  discussion  and 
thought.  I feel  quite  sure  that  all  of  you  who  are  interested  in  drill- 
ing will  learn  of  a number  of  interesting  things  which  will  be  worked 
out  under  Mr.  Notman’s  direction  within  the  next  year  or  two. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


63 


Limits  In  Steel  and  Drill-Bit 

There  is  something  that  I would  like  to  ask,  and  that  is  just  when 
may  we  expect  to  reach  the  limit  in  decreasing  the  size  of  the  steel  and 
the  size  of  the  drill-bit — that  is,  the  limit  at  which  speed  will  stop  in- 
creasing, as  it  should,  theoretically?  I should  like  to  call  on  Mr.  Not- 
man;  I have  heard  so  many  different  opinions,  claiming  that  so  far  we 
have  not  as  yet  reached  the  limit,  but  as  a matter  of  fact  are  a long  way 
from  it.  I think  that  Mr.  Notman’s  figures  and  his  opinion  will  throw 
a lot  of  light  on  the  subject. 

MR.  NOTMAN:  The  opinion  that  I started  off  witty  was  that  while 
reducing  the  size  of  the  steel  we  should  hope  to  obtain  something  like 
a theoretical  increase  in  drilling  speed,  due  to  the  smaller  area  of  the 
round  cut;  but  we  discovered  that  the  relative  power  of  the  machine  and 
the  size  of  the  steel  interlocked  so  that  we  did  not  get  a theoretical 
increase  in  drilling  speed,  when  you  reduced  the  size  of  the  steel  for 
which  the  machine  was  probably  designed,  and  I am  not  prepared  to 
offer  any  information  on  that  subject.  The  limiting  factor,  if  any,  so 
far  as  the  operator  is  concerned,  is  the  question  of  minimum  size  hole 
in  which  you  can  get  sufficient  powder  to  do  the  work.  Of  course,  it  is 
desirable  to  concentrate  the  powder  at  the  bottom  of  the  bore-hole  as  far 
as  you  can,  and  the  inherent  desire  in  the.  miner  for  a big  hole,  in  order 
to  get  further  down  there,  is  pretty  hard  to  overcome.  They  offer  that 
as  an  objection  to  the  use  of  1-in.  steel  in  drifting;  but,  on  the  other  hand, 
they  have  never  complained  at  all  to  the  use  of  %-in.  steel  in  raising  or 
stoping  conditions,  where  the  importance  is  not  as  great  as  it  is  in  drift- 
ing. I think  perhaps  some  of  the  drill-men  could  tell  us  about  the  pro- 
portionate condition  of  the  drill  and  the  size  of  steel.  I would  like  to 
add  that  as  a matter  o^  fact,  we  have  been  using  %-in.  hexagon  steel  with 
a small  bit,  for  the  stopers,  and  the  work  done  by  one  of  these  modern 
high-speed  stopers  is  just  exactly  as  severe  as  it  is  in  the  case  of  a 
drifting  machine.  The  foot-pound  pressure  is  less,  but  the  actual  work 
done  on  the  steel  is  a little  more,  I think,  in  the  case  of  the  newer  stop- 
ers than  drifting  machines.  They  have  been  making  exhaustive  experi- 
ments on  this  point. 

MR.  BAYLES:  We  have  found  that  it  depends  largely  on  the  air 
pressure  and  hardness  of  rock  with  some  of  the  present  day  drills.  Steel 
becomes  bent,  and  you  cannot  afford  to  have  bent  steel;  drilling  falls  off 
often  30%  by  a slight  bending  of  the  steel.  In  fact,  if  some  of  the  bent 
steel  is  examined  you  would  not  notice  that  it  is  bent;  but  if  you  tested 
it,  it  will  fall  short  20%.  Line  it  up,  and  you  find  that  it  is  bent.  Take 
the  same  steel  and  straighten  it  out  an  the  anvil  and  sharpen  it,  and 
you  get  20%  more  drilling.  I have  never  been  able  to  understand  why 
that  should  make  steel  drilling  fall  off  so  much;  but  it  does,  invariably. 

MR.  MITKE:  Mr.  Walsh,  is  it  possible  for  you  to  give  us  just  a brief 
summary  of  some  of  Mr.  G.  H.  Gilman’s  ideas,  or  would  you  have  to 
give  practically  the  whole  paper? 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


(»4 


[Mr.  Walsh  then  read  Mr.  Gilman’s  paper,  which  views  the  question 
from  the  standpoint  of  a manufacturer,  appears  on  page  721  of  the 
Proceedings.] 

MR.  JOHN  KIDDIE:  I might  state  that  we  made  some  tentative  ex- 
periments in  which  we  found  that  the  amoupt  of  power  necessary  to  drill 
the  holes  depended  on  the  area  of  the  hole,  that  is  to  say,  the  area  of  the 
bit.  Mt.  Notman  seems  to  be  of  the  opinion  that  you  could  reduce  the 
size  of  the  hole  so  as  to  get  powder  enough  in  there  (perhaps,  if  necessary, 
using  stronger  powder),  that  is  to  say,  you  could  get  powder  into  a 
smaller  hole  to  break  the  ground,  provided  you  can  drill  it  with  the  size 
steel,  that  is,  by  .hand  bit.  It  is  not  possible  to  improve  the  grade  of  the 
steel  so  that  you  could  use  a smaller  steel  and  not  have  the  successive 
break. 

MR.  WALSH:  The  point  that  Mr.  Notman  made  was  that  they  get 
better  results  in  some  cases  with  the  bigger  steel  and  bigger  hole. 

MR.  KIDDIE:  Yes,  my  notion  was  that  perhaps  the  big  drifting  ma- 
chines were  too  powerful  for  the  size  of  the  hole. 

MR.  WALSH:  I would  imagine  with  the  lugger  machine  and  the 
smaller  gage  and  the  smaller  steel  you  could  get  more  penetration,  and 
it  would  affect  your  rotation  so  that  you  could  cut  down  your  drilling 
speed.  Where  you  use  the  larger  steel  it  would  fit  in  to  better  advantage. 
Putting  same  energy  into  the  same  machine  and  using  a lighter  blow, 
with  not  so  much  penetration  but  a faster  rotation,  and  you  might  get 
different  results.  As  you  said,  you  might  use  the  wider  machine  with  the 
smaller  steel  and  get  the  same  results. 

MR.  NOTMAN:  We  found  that  with  the  18  Leyner,  cutting  down  from 
the  1%  in.  to  the  1 in.,  we  got  practically  the  theoretical  increase  in  drill- 
ing speeds,  but  when  we  went  to  the  heavier  machines — the  248  Leyner, 
or  the  D.  X.  61 — you  do  not  get  that  increase. 

MR.  BAYLES : There  are  two  things  that  occurred  to  me  which  I wished 
to  ask  Mr.  Notman:  He  speaks  of  including  in  the  supplies  a box-wrench 
to  pull  out  the  steel:  Did  he  mean  by  that  that  the  maker  should  carry 
8 or  10  different  types  of  chuck-wrenches,  each  with  a different  size  box- 
wrench  in  it? 

MR.  NOTMAN:  That  is  exactly  what  I meant.  I did  not  intend  to 
put  the  burden  of  the  supplying  of  those  wrenches  upon  the  manufac- 
turers. We  make  our  own  wrenches,  and  probably  will  continue  to  do  so. 

Use  of  the  Box- Wrench 

In  saying  that  we  wanted  to  use  this  box-wrench  for  pulling  out  steel,  it 
often  happens  that  a drill  cannot  be  withdrawn  readily  when  run  down, 
and  if  a man  had  a box-wrench  which  would  fit  behind  the  steel,  a slight 
turn  of  it  would  free  that  steel  and  he  could  withdraw  it.  The  practice  is 
to  take  a monkey-wrench  and  stick  that  behind  it,  and  twist  and  pull  at 


I 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS  65 

the  same  time.  It  is  not  for  extracting  steel  that  is  stuck  in  the  ground 
but  simply  steel  that  cannot  be  slipped  out  of  the  machine  readily  to 
withdraw  it.  I think  such  a wrench  could  be  made  to  fit  any  one  of  these 
sections,  either  a big  chuck-wrench  or  a smaller  one.  What  we  want  is 
two  double-ended  wrenches  to  fit  all  the  parts  which  are  ordinarily  used. 

MR.  WALSH  : Mr.  Notman’s  paper  represents  a lot  of  work,  but  there 
seems  to  be  several  things  that  perhaps  do  not  agree.  You  talk  about 
making  side-rods  and  standardizing  them  at  ^ in.  That  may  mean 
changing  all  drop  forgings,  and  a changing  of  dies,  which  are  extremely 
expensive;  perhaps  it  means  changing  the  G-bolts.  While  I am  not 
attempting  to  throw  cold  water  on  the  idea,  these  things  are  to  be  con- 
sidered from  the  manufacturers’  standpoint  on  machines  already  in  the 
field.  It  might  throw  a big  burden  on  the  manufacturer. 

MR.  NOTMAN : I think  that  is  an  important  point.  It  would  not 
throw  the  burden  on  the  manufacturer  alone  from  the  fact  that  all  the 
users  are  equipped  with  drills  which  have  been  turned  out  and  not  one 
of  us  can  afford  to  scrap  anything  useful.  It  is  something  that  we  cannot 
hope  to  effect  over  night,  but  if  it  were  a basis  for  future  designing,  I 
think  we  have  accomplished  a great  deal. 

MR.  BAYLES : Mr.  Notman  suggests  in  one  part  of  his  paper  that  the 
nuts  on  the  standard  rods  should  be  square,  while  in  another  he  recom- 
mends a i-in.  bult  with  a standard  rod  and  hexagon  nut.  Is  that  correct? 

MR.  NOTMAN : I do  not  know  that  there  is  any  particular  choice  in 
the  matter ; I believe  that  either  one  would  be  satisfactory. 

MR.  BAYLES : Being  one  so  easy  to  get  at,  I think  that  a hexagon  nut 
would  be  better  on  account  of  not  having  the  sharp  corners  of  the  square 
nut.  I think  the  hexagon  nut  is  used  today. 

In  Mr.  Gilman’s  paper  it  is  said  that  the  minimum  weight  of  a jack- 
harner  is  25  to  30  lb.  on  the  ground.  I do  not  think  it  is  practical  to 
manufacture  a serviceable  jackhamer  much  under  30  lb.  There  have  been 
jackhamers  on  the  market  around  201  b..  for  many  years,  but  they  do  not 
appear  to  be  successful,  even  if  one  foreign  jackhamer  that  I have  seen 
only  weighs  10%  lb.  That  I think  is  rather  light. 

MR.  MITKE:  Yes. 

MR.  BAYLES : TheTe  was  one  of  19  lb.  on  the  market  for  a while 
before  the  war — I do  not  know  how  it  is  since — and  it  was  very  good,  but 
of  course  it  would  not  compete  with  the  bigger  tools ; but  for  its  purpose 
it  is  very  satisfactory.  We  have  one  of  20  lb.  which  has  a big  demand. 

MR.  NOTMAN : I think  it  is  important  not  to  lean  backwards  in 
attempts  to  standardize  on  designs.  I think  that  is  absolutely  agreed. 
Any  question  of  standardization  that  does  involve  details  of  design  should 
be  given  careful  consideration.  I think  that  also  applies  to  the  question 
of  weight  of  the  machine.  You  can  never  tell  until  you  have  tried  it 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


6<J 

whether  you  can  get  by  with  a machine  weighing  a third  less  than  the 
machine  you  are  using. 

MR.  BAYLES:  No;  the  natural  law  of  supply  and  demand  governs 
weight  of  machines,  without  our  doing  it  here. 

MR.  MITKE:  What  weights  of  small  machines  are  in  greatest  demand? 

A MEMBER:  There  are  more  40  or  45-lb.  tools  sold,  though  a 50  or  60- 
lb.  tool  will  do  more  work. 

A MEMBER:  I think  Mr.  Notman’s  conclusions  regarding  the  weight 
of  the  drill  and  stand-up  answer  that  question  very  well. 

MR.  BAYLES:  It  would  be  foolish  for  us  to  determine  the  weight  of 
the  tools  for  certain  work  now,  because  we  know  that  five  years  ago  we 
had  an  idea  that  certain  work  required  a 200-lb.  tool,  which  today  is 
performed  by  a 50  or  40-lb.  tool,  and  two  years  from  now  somebody  may 
be  doing  it  with  one  of  10  pounds. 

MR.  MITKE:  The  changes  are  certainly  remarkable.  Take  one  mine 
where  they  considered  that  the  18  Leyner  was  the  only  machine  to  drill 
the  ground,  and  today  they  just  use  the  jackhamer  and  drill  it  the  same 
as  they  did  then.  That  change  was  made  in  an  entire  mine  within  a year 
or  a year  and  a quarter,  so  we  cannot  help  being  conservative  when  we 
consider  the  future.  Nevertheless,  it  is  interesting  to  forecast  as  near  as 
possible  what  might  be  the  demand,  and  what  the  general  trend  will  be. 

A MEMBER:  I think  that  the  trend  is  more  for  light  machines.  The 
very  fact  that  they  are  reverting  to  lighter  steel  means  that  they  must 
place  their  holes  in  the  proper  position  and  get  the  powder  distributed 
properly;  rather  than  drill  a few  large  holes,  they  should  drill  more  small 
ones  and  get  them  properly  placed.  Such  is  the  secret  of  the  light  drill, 
and  that  is  why  it  is  becoming  more  popular.  I think  it  will  be  carried 
even  further;  the  tendency  is  for  a lighter  machine. 

A MEMBER:  Though  for  shaft  sinking,  for  instance,  we  will  have  to 
use  a heavier  machine. 

MR.  BAYLES:  But  still  much  lighter. 

A MEMBER:  I am  wondering  if  the  mining  companies,  in  trying  to 
get  the  results  we  aim  at,  and  in  placing  so  much  burden  upon  the  rock- 
drill  itself,  whether  they  are  looking  into  the  drilled  steel  and  also  their 
explosives.  I think  both  should  be  studied.  We  can  get  more  powerful 
explosives,  and  we  can  drill  smaller  holes — that  will  be  increased  efficiency 
all  around — and  also  get  a bit  that  will  last  longer. 

MR.  MITKE:  I think  that  it  is  only  a question  of  time  now. 

A MEMBER:  Many  times  they  make  a comparison  in  different  mines, 
but  in  some  they  do  not  take  into  account  the  condition  of  the  drilling 
bits.  . They  report  so  many  feet  drilled  in  a given  time.  Possibly  the 
difference  is  entirely  due  to  other  than  the  machine  itself.  The  Copper 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


67 


Queen  is  the  only  mine  that  looks  at  a drilling  bit  to  determine  how  dull 
it  is. 

MR.  NOTMAN:  In  justice  to  the  drill  manufacturers,!  would  like  to 
go  on  record  as  being  of  the  opinion  that  the  design  of  the  machine,  and 
the  work  that  the  machines  are  doing,  have  improved  much  more  than 
the  steel  that  is  used  in  the  machine,  and  the  general  routine  of  opera- 
tions through  which  the  machine  is  put.  There  is  no  doubt  about  that. 
Our  activities  should  be  directed  not  towards  changing  the  designs  of  the 
machines,  or  attempting  to  dictate  what  the  designs  of  the  machines 
should  be,  but  to  see  that  the  fittings  which  are  used  in  the  routine 
operation  of  drilling  are  so  designed  that  the  manipulator  can  use  them 
to  the  best  advantage. 


Sub-Committee  on  Standardization  of  Mine  Timbers 

Mr.  Chas.  A.  Mitke  presided. 

CHAIRMAN  MITKE:  Mr.  Norman  Carmichael,  general  manager  for 
the  Arizona  Copper  Co.,  and  chairman  of  this  Committee,  has  found  it 
impossible  to  attend,  but  has  sent  his  deputy,  Mr.  John  Kiddie,  superin- 
tendent of  mines  for  that  company  in  his  stead. 

[Mr.  Kiddie  explained  that  while  considerable  work  had  already  been 
accomplished,  such  as  the  compiling  of  data  from  17  large  companies,  the 
Committee  did  not  feel  that  it  was  yet  in  a position  to  make  a complete 
report;  and  it  was  the  desire  of  Mr.  Carmichael  that  more  time  should  be 
allowed  the  Committee  in  order  to  investigate  the  subject  more  thoroughly 
and  be  in  a position  to  submit  a report  at  the  end  of  the  coming  year 
(1921).] 


Sub-Committee  on  Metal  Mine  Ventilation 

Mr.  Chas.  A.  Mitke  presided. 

The  following  members  were  present:  A Stoddard,  D,  Rait,  Robert 
Bell,  and  W.  A.  Rowe. 

A preliminary  questionnaire,  to  be  sent  to  operators  in  order  to  obtain 
sufficient  information  to  constitute  a working  basis,  was  presented  to 
members  by  the  Chairman,  and  the  various  points  embodied  in  this  ques- 
tionnaire taken  up  and  discussed. 

It  was  agreed  that  the  principal  avenues  to  be  followed  by  this  Com- 
mittee would  be  the  investigating  of  conditions  in  underground  working 
places,  with  the  idea  of  establishing  a standard  mine  atmosphere.  It  was 
also  hoped  that  the  Committee — which  is  composed  of  both  operators  and 
manufacturers — might  work  out  a set  of  recommendations  for  different 
kinds  of  standard  ventilating  equipment,  which  would  thoroughly  ven- 
tilate the  so-called  dead-ends  in  drifts,  raises,  and  stopes. 


68 


REPORT  OF  PROCEEDINGS 


Sub-Committee  on  Mechanical  Loading  Underground 

Mr.  Lucien  Eaton  is  chairman. 

In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Eaton  no  meetings  were  held,  but  the  Chairman 
reported  that  a questionnaire  is  being  prepared  which  will  be  sent  to  all 
Committee  members,  operators,  and  manufacturers  of  underground  power 
shovels,  in  order  to  compile  sufficient  information  to  constitute  a working 
basis. 

Sub-Committee  on  Steam-Shovel  Equipment  and  Operations 

Mr.  H.  C.  Goodrich  is  chairman. 

In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Goodrich,  no  meetings  were  held,  but  the  Chair- 
man reports  that  a questionnaire  is  being  prepared,  which  will  be  sent  to 
all  operators  and  manufacturers  of  steam-shovel  equipment. 


Sub-Committee  on  Underground  Transportation 

Mr.  Wm.  B.  Daly  is  chairman. 

In  the  absence  of  Mr.  Daly,  no  meetings  were  held,  but  it  is  understood 
that  a questionnaire  has  been  prepared  which  will  be  sent  to  all  Com- 
mittee members  and  operators  in  districts  not  represented  by  Committee 
members. 


Sub-Committee  on  Fire-Fighting  Equipment 

The  General  Chairman,  Mr.  Chas.  A.  Mitke,  presided. 

CHAIRMAN  MITKE:  Mr.  Connibear,  chairman  of  this  Committee,  has 
found  it  impossible  to  attend  the  meeting,  but  on  behalf  of  his  Committee, 
has  forwarded  a preliminary  report,  which  I will  ask  Mr.  Guy  Johnson,  a 
member  of  this  Committee,  to  read  for  our  benefit. 

MR.  JOHNSON:  (Reading  the  report): 

A canvas  is  being  made  to  ascertain  the  amount  and  variety  of  fire-fight- 
ing equipment  that  metal-mine  operators  are  using.  To  obtain  this  infor- 
mation, copies  of  a questionnaire  on  Fire-Fighting  Equipment  were  distri- 
buted'. The  length  of  time  since  the  organization  of  this  Committee  was 
perfected  has  not  been  sufficient  to  reach  operators  in  remote  parts  of  the 
country. 

The  number  of  questionnaires  that  have  been  received  by  the  Committee 
from  the  operators  of  copper  and  iron  mines  in  the  Lake  Superior  district 
is  sufficient  to  present  an  adequate  report  of  this  district ; but  with  this 
exception,  but  few  reports  have  been  received.  Data  is  not  available  at 
present  from  the  other  important  districts,  due  to  the  delay  in  transmission 
of  the  same. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


GO 


Mine  Rescue  Apparatus 

The  value  of  rescue  apparatus  in  fighting  mine  fires,  and  especially  when 
lives  are  in  danger,  is  universally  acknowledged.  The  activities  of  the  U.  S. 
Bereau  of  Mines  have  extended  into  all  mining  districts,  and  have  demons- 
trated that  oxygen  rescue  apparatus  must  be  accepted  as  an  essential  part 
of  a mine  fire  equipment- 

At  the  present  time,  apparatus  used  in  this  country  consists  of  four 
types ; the  Fluess,  the  Gibbs,  the  Paul,  and  the  Draeger.  The  Draeger, 
however,  is  slowly  but  surely  being  replaced  by  the  other  types. 

An  attempt  to  standardize  on  a particular  apparatus  will  not  meet  with 
the  approbation  of  mine  operators.  Attention  should  be  directed  to  the 
advisability  of  using  an  apparatus  that  meets  with  the  general  require- 
ments as  recommended  by  the  Bureau  of  Mines  in  Technical  Paper  82, 
pages  23  and  24. 

Mine  operators  of  the  Lake  Superior  district  have  approximately  150 
machines.  A report  of  the  conditions  of  these  machines  for  the  past  two 
years,  recently  issued  by  the  Bureau,  indicates  that  action  for  improve- 
ment is  recommended.  This  applies  not  only  to  the  apparatus,  but  more 
particularly  to  the  training  of  employes  in  the  use  of  them. 

Mechanical  Resuscitation  Devices 

This  apparatus  is  not  now  accepted  with  the  high  degree  of  favor  as 
it  was  a few  years  ago.  More  attention  is  being  given  to  manual  methods. 
Not  only  is  the  effectiveness  of  mechanical  devices  questioned,  but  the 
probability  of  delay  in  obtaining  a machine  immediately  when  needed 
reduces  the  chances  of  resuscitating  an  unconscious  person. 

Fire  Extinguishers 

These  are  being  installed  underground — both  the  carbon  tetrachloride 
and  the  soda-acid  types.  Objections  have  been  raised  to  their  use.  Increas- 
ed use  of  electricity  as  a motive  power  for  haulage,  hoisting,  and  plumbing 
has  resulted  in  the  adoption  of  the  tetrachloride  type  for  extinguishing 
electrical  fires  in  incipient  stages.  Additional  information  is  imperative 
before  any  conclusions  can  be  deduced. 

Fire-hose 

Very  few  mines,  compared  to  the  total  number  operated  in  the  metal 
districts,  have  adequate  underground  fire-hose  equipment.  In  the  question- 
naires that  have  been  returned,  only  one  mining  company  has  adopted  this 
method  in  a comprehensive  way. 

Portable  Blowers 

There  are  mining  companies  that  resort  to  the  portable  blowers  as  an 
effective  method  of  fighting  underground  fires,  but  the  Committee  has  not 
yet  received  information  from  those  companies  which  are  known  to  have 
made  the  most  advanced  strides  in  this  direction.  Many  mines  have  blow- 


70 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


ers  installed  to  improve  ventilation,  and  they  report  that  they  are  avail- 
able for  fire  emergencies-  Adjustments  are  necessary,  and  the  delay  that 
will  follow  thereby  is  not  known  at  the  present  time. 

Bulkhead  Material 

Many  companies  report  maintaining  posts,  planks,  and  sand  for  bulkhead 
purposes.  Due  to  the  large  volume  of  humidity,  which  is  common  in  the 
atmosphere  of  many  mines,  cement  is  not  stored  underground.  Other 
operators  report  that  substantial  bulkheads  have  been  provided'  in  order 
to  ensure  the  safety  of  mines  in  case  an  unexpected  volume  of  water  is 
encountered,  and  that  they  can  be  utilized  to  advantage  in  limiting  a 
fire-zone. 

Fire  Protection  at  Collar  of  Shafts 

The  use  of  iron  doors  and  spraying  systems  at  collar  of  shafts  have  been 
adopted  by  a few  operators ; others  report  that  steel  head-frames  and 
concrete  shafts  eliminate  fire  hazards,  and  that  these  agencies  are  not 
necessary.  Most  operators,  however,  have  not  recorded  themselves  relative 
to  their  value. 

Stench  System  of  Alarm 

This  system  of  alarming  underground  employees  when  a fire  occurs  has 
been  adopted  by  several  large  operators,  and  its  affectiveness  is  reported 
to  be  very  satisfactory. 

Conclusion 

Additional  information  is  absolutely  necessary  before  the  Committee  can 
record  its  recommendations.  This  will  require  more  time  than  was  at 
our  disposal  this  year.  An  effort  will  be  made  to  enlarge  the  membership 
of  the  Committee  so  that  further  delay  in  obtaining  desired  information 
may  be  overcome. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


71 


STANDARDIZATION 


ORIGINAL  PAPERS  PRESENTED  AT  THE  TWENTY-THIRD 
ANNUAL  CONVENTION  OF  THE  AMERICAN  MIN- 
ING CONGRESS,  DENVER,  COL.,  NOVEMBER 
15-20,  1920— STANDARDIZATION 
SECTION 

JOINT  REPORT  OF  SUB-COMMITTEES  ON  STANDARDIZA- 
TION OF  UNDERGROUND  POWER  TRANSMISSION  AND 
STANDARDIZATION  OF  POWER  EQUIPMENT 

Submitted  by  K.  A.  PAULY  and  A.  B.  KISER,  Chairmen  of  the  Sub-Com- 
mittees on  Power  Equipment  and  Underground  Transmission 

On  account  of  the  intimate  relationship  between  power 
transmission  and  power  equipment,  workable  standards  in 
these  two  fields  can  be  developed  only  through  closest  co-oper- 
ation between  those  interested  in  these  two  phases  of  the 
general  problem  of  standardization  of  mining  equipment. 
Appreciation  of  this  fact  from  the  first,  lead  the  Chairmen  of 
Sub-Committees  No.  3 (Underground  Power  Transmission) 
and  No.  7 (Power  Equipment)  to  hold  their  meetings  jointly. 
Not  only  did  this  procedure  permit  of  the  closest  co-operation 
between  the  two  Committees,  but  gave  each  the  benefit  of  the 
experience  of  the  members  of  both. 

We  wish  here  to  express  our  appreciation  of  the  keen  inter- 
est shown  by  the  members  of  our  Sub-Committees  and  the 
valuable  assistance  which  they  afforded  us  by  their  construct- 
ive suggestions  concerning  many  of  the  perplexing  problems. 
We  are  also  indebted  to  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Mines 
for  providing  us  with  a meeting-place  and  a secretary  during 
our  meetings. 

Two  joint  meetings  were  held  at  Pittsburgh  on  May  20 
and  21,  and  October  19  and  20. 

Those  present  at  the  first  meeting  were:  Messrs.  R.  L. 
Kingsland,  R.  Kudlich  and  L.  D.  Usley,  representing  0.  P. 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Hood,  Graham  Bright,  R.  W.  Moore,  A.  L.  Nicht,  F.  L.  Stone, 
A.  B.  Kiser,  Chairman  of  Sub-Committee  No.  3,  and  K.  A. 
Pauly,  Chairman  of  Sub-Committee  No.  7. 

Those  present  at  the  second  meeting  were:  Messrs.  R.  L. 
Kingsland,  R.  Kudlich  and  L.  D.  Ilsley,  representing  0.  P. 
Hood,  Graham  Bright,  A.  J.  Nicht,  A.  B.  Kiser  and  K.  A. 
Pauly. 

In  considering  the  problem  of  standardization,  we  have 
divided  it  into  two  parts — the  standardization  of  equipment, 
and  the  standardization  of  practice  in  the  installation  and 
operation  of  equipment. 

As  the  Electric  Power  Club  has  for  its  object  the  standard- 
ization of  the  capacities,  voltages,  speeds  and  essential  me- 
chanical features  of  electric  motors,  generators,  transformers, 
etc. ; and  as  its  standards  are  accepted  throughout  the  coun- 
try, it  was  suggested  that  we  adopt  them  as  our  standards  of 
equipment.  It  was  also  suggested  that  the  standardization 
rules  of  the  American  Institute  of  Electrical  Engineers  be 
adopted  as  our  standards  of  technical  matters. 

With  the  standardization  of  equipment  disposed  of,  we 
devoted  our  time  and  attention  to  the  standardization  of  prac- 
tice. This  field  has  been  thoroughly  covered  by  the  Bureau 
of  Mines  in  its  Technical  Paper  No.  138,  entitled  ‘Suggested 
Rules  for  Installing  and  Using  Electrical  Equipment  in  Bitu- 
minous Coal  Mines,’  and  these  were  taken  as  the  basis  of  our 
work.  Each  rule  was  thoroughly  discussed  and  revised  where 
it  seemed  advisable  to  do  so,  for  the  purpose  of  clarifying  it, 
or  making  it  conform  to  present-day  practice. 

The  rules  as  modified  at  our  first  meeting  were  sent  to  each 
member  of  both  Sub-Committees,  with  the  request  that  they 
act  as  chairmen  of  local  committees  and  obtain  suggestions 
as  to  further  modifications  from  the  engineers  in  their  respec- 
tive districts.  This  brought  many  valuable  suggestions  from 
the  districts  that  were  not  represented  at  the  Pittsburgh  meet- 
ing. 

The  suggestions  obtained  in  this  way  were  circularized  and 
thoroughly  discussed  at  our  second  meeting,  and  a final  draft 
of  the  suggested  rules  made. 

It  has  been  impossible,  with  the  time  at  our  disposal,  to 
devote  as  much  attention  to  some  matters  as  we  would  like  to 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


73 


have  given  them  before  submitting  our  report,  but  it  is  felt 
that  the  best  results  can  be  accomplished  by  submitting  the 
rules  in  their  present  form. 

The  rules  as  they  appear  in  Technical  Paper  No.  138,  and 
as  modified  by  our  Committees,  cover  coal-mining  conditions, 
but  they  are  applicable  to  metal  mining  hy  omitting  those 
paragraphs  that  apply  to  the  existence  of  gas  or  coal  dust  in 
explosive  mixtures. 

We  therefore  submit  the  following  as  the  joint  recommen- 
dations of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Underground  Power  Trans- 
mission and  on  Power  Equipment: 

That  the  standards  of  the  Electric  Power  Club  be  adopted 
to  our  standards  of  electrical  equipment : 

That  the  standardization  rules  of  the  American  Institute  of 
Electrical  Engineers  be  adopted  as  our  technical  standards; 
and 

That  the  following  rules  be  adopted  as  our  standards  of 
practice  in  the  installation  and  operation  of  transmission  and 
power  equipment : 

Basis  of  the  Rules 

Five  basic  measures  for  safeguarding  the  use  of  electricity 
in  mines  are  as  follows: 

1.  Remove  the  contributory  causes  of  accidents  or 
danger. 

2.  Remove  from  the  vicinity  of  electric  apparatus  all 
elements  susceptible  to  the  influence  of  electricity. 

3.  Keep  the  electric  current  where  it  belongs,  if  possible. 
If  not,  limit  the  area  of  its  activity  by  protective 
devices. 

4.  Use  a large  factor  of  safety  in  the  selection,  installa- 
tion and  inspection  ,of  equipment. 

5.  Have  full  control  of  the  movements  of  electrically 
driven  machines. 

Each  rule  that  is  given  in  this  report  is  proposed  as  neces- 
sary or  helpful  to  the  accomplishment  of  one  or  more  of  these 
measures. 


74  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Definitions  of  Terms  Used 

The  meanings  of  some  of  the  terms  and  expressions  as  used 
in  this  report  are  defined  below  in  order  to  avoid  confusion: 

Alive 

See  definition  of  “live.” 

Approved 

This  term  means  accepted  as  suitable  by  a competent  com- 
mittee, board  or  organization  designated  by  those  adopting 
the  rules. 

Authorized  Person 

A person  appointed  or  permitted  by  the  official  designated 
by  the  State  mining  laws  as  the  one  in  charge  of  the  opera- 
tion of  the  mine  to  carry  out  certain  duties  incident  to  the 
generation,  transformation  and  distribution  or  use  of  electric 
energy  in  the  mine,  such  person  being  one  who  is  competent 
within  the  purpose  of  the  rule  in  which  the  term  is  used. 

Electric  System 

This  includes  all  electric  apparatus  pertaining  to  the  oper- 
ation of  the  mine,  and  under  the  control  of  the  mine  officials, 
which  is  connected  electrically  to  a common  source  of  voltage 
or  which  is  installed  so  that  it  can  be  thus  connected. 

Grounded  Circuit 

A circuit  that  is  permanently  grounded  at  one  or  more 
points. 

Grounding 

As  applied  to  any  object  used  in  connection  with  a perma- 
nently grounded  electric  system,  this  term  means  connecting 
such  object  to  the  earth  in  such  a way  that  a path  of  low 
resistance  is  provided  between  the  object  and  the  perma- 
nently grounded  point  of  the  system.  A connection  to  a thor- 
oughly bonded  rail  is  an  example  of  a good  ground  connection. 

Grounding,  as  applied  to  any  object  used  in  connection  with 
an  electric  system  that  is  not  provided  with  a permanent 
ground,  means  making  connection  to  the  general  mass  of 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


75 


earth  in  such  a manner  as  will  ensure  at  all  times  an  immedi- 
ate discharge  of  electrical  energy  without  danger. 

Ground  Return 

That  part  of  a circuit  which  is  the  earth,  or  metallic  con- 
ductors intimately  associated  with  the  earth,  and  which  is 
practically  at  earth  potential  at  all  points,  is  a ground  return. 
Live 

The  word  “live”  means  electrically  connected  to  a source 
of  voltage  difference,  or  electrically  charged  so  as  to  have  a 
voltage  different  from  that  of  the  earth. 

Permissible  Equipment 

This  refers  to  any  equipment  that  is  listed  with  the  United 
States  Bureau  of  Mines  as  permissible  for  use  in  such  places 
as  containing  gas  or  coal  dust  in  explosive  mixtures. 

Portable  Electric  Lamps 

Electric  lamps  that  may  be  carried  about  while  lighted  are 
portable.  This  general  term  includes  lamps  operated  by 
batteries  and  lamps  connected  to  a source  of  power  by  a 
flexible  conductor,  whose  length  limits  the  range  over  which 
the  lamp  may  be  used. 

Self-contained  Portable  Electric  Lamps 

Electric  lamps  that  are  operated  by  an  electric  battery, 
which  is  designed  to  be  carried  about  by  the  user  of  the  lamp, 
are  self-contained. 

Portable  Motors 

Motors  that  are  intended  for  service  here  and  there  as  occa- 
sion requires,  and  that  are  so  constructed  or  mounted  as  to 
facilitate  moving  them  from  place  to  place,  are  termed  port- 
able. 

Stationary  Motors 

All  motors  not  included  in  the  class  of  portable  motors  shall 
be  considered  as  stationary  motors. 

Potential 

The  words  “potential”  and  “voltage”  are  synonymous,  and 
mean  electric  pressure. 


76  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Difference  of  Potential 

This  expression  means  the  difference  in  electric  pressure 
existing  between  any  two  points  in  an  electric  system,  or 
between  any  point  of  such  a system  and  the  earth,  as  deter- 
mined by  a voltmeter. 

Potential  of  a Circuit 

The  potential  or  voltage  of  a circuit,  machine,  or  any  piece 
of  electric  apparatus,  means  the  voltage  normally  existing 
between  the  conductors  of  such  circuit  or  the  terminals  of 
such  machine  or  appartus.  In  alternating  current  systems 
the  voltage  of  the  system  shall  be  that  indicated  by  a volt- 
meter. 

(a)  Any  voltage  less  than  301  volts  shall  be  deemed  a 
low  voltage. 

(b)  Any  voltage  greater  than  301  volts,  but  less  than 
651  volts,  shall  be  deemed  medium  voltage. 

(c)  Any  voltage  in  excess  of  651  volts  shall  be  deemed 
a high  voltage. 

Protected 

This  word  when  applied  to  the  current-carrying  parts  of 
an  electric  system,  means  that  accidental  contact  with  such 
parts  is  prevented  by  approved  guards. 

Shock-proof 

As  applied  to  the  current-carrying  parts  of  an  electric  sys- 
tem, excepting  trolley  wires,  this  term  is  taken  to  mean  that' 
contact  with  such  parts  is  prevented  by  the  use  of  grounded 
metallic  coverings  or  sheaths. 

Generating  Station 

A station  in  which  electric  geenrators  are  operated  by  prime 
movers. 

Sub-station 

A station  in  which  the  current  is  changed  in  character  or 
voltage. 

Underground  Station 

A place  underground  in  which  there  are  transformers- 
switchboards  or  electric  machines  other  than  portable  motors, 
or  any  one  of  them. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


77 


Switchboard 

The  essential  mounting  common  to  several  pieces  of  switch- 
gear  or  controlling  appliances. 

Voltage 

See  definition  of  “potential.” 

DIVISION  1.— GENERAL  RULES 
Man  in  Charge  of  Electrical  Equipment 

1.  At  each  mine  where  electricity  is  used  underground, 
there  shall  be  in  charge  of  the  electrical  equipment  a man 
fitted  for  his  position  by  ability,  training  and  experience. 
The  character  of  the  equipment  will  determine  the  qualifica- 
tions of  the  mine  electrician,  and  he  shall  be  thoroughly 
familiar  with  the  operation  and  maintenance  of  the  equipment 
under  his  charge. 

Persons  Working  on  Electrical  Equipment 

2.  No  person  shall  be  allowed  to  work  on  or  with  electrical 
equipment  of  any  kind  unless  he  has  been  previously  instructed 
by  an  authorized  person  in  the  performance  of  his  duties. 

Construction  and  Rating  of  Apparatus  and  Relation  of  Capacity 
to  Duty 

3.  All  electrical  equipment  shall  be  rated  in  accordance 
with  the  current-standardization  rules  of  the  American  Insti- 
tute of  Electrical  Engineers. 

4.  The  rating  of  each  piece  of  electrical  equipment  shall 
be  stamped  on  it,  or  inscribed  on  a metal  plate  suitably 
mounted  and  maintained  upon  the  equipment.  The  inscrip- 
tion on  the  plate  shall  indicate  whether  the  rating  is  for  con- 
tinuous or  intermittent  service,  and  shall  be  in  accordance 
with  the  name-plate  requirements  of  the  American  Institute 
of  Electrical  Engineers. 

5.  All  equipment  shall  be  operated  within  its  rated  capac- 
ity as  defined  by  the  standardization  rules  of  the  American 
Institute  of  Electrical  Engineers. 

Permissible  Voltages 

6.  High  voltages  may  be  used  for  transmission  purposes 
underground,  provided  that  such  circuits  are  carried  within 


78 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


metallic  sheaths  or  coverings,  with  the  sheath  or  covering 
permanently  grounded.  This  voltage  may  be  applied  only  to 
transformers  or  to  motors  in  which  the  high-voltage  windings 
are  a part  of  the  stationary  element.  Medium  or  low  voltage 
may  be  applied  to  all  electrical  equipment. 

Mechanical  Construction  of  Installation 

7.  Care  shall  be  taken  to  ensure  good  mechanical  construc- 
tion and  neat  workmanship  in  connection  with  all  wiring  and 
the  installation  of  equipment. 

Prevention  of  Accidental  Contact 

8.  Space  shall  be  provided  for  free  movement  where  regu- 
lar passing  is  required  or  permitted  around  all  unprotected 
parts  of  the  electric  system,  and  places  where  persons  must 
pass  close  to  or  adjust  permanently  installed  electrical  machin- 
ery shall  be  sufficiently  lighted. 

9.  The  standing  room  around  all  electrical  equipment  shall 
be  kept  as  dry  as  practicable.  At  any  place  where  it  is  neces- 
sary to  manipulate  or  adjust  medium  or  high-voltage  live 
equipment — including  switches,  motor  starters,  and  other 
controlling  appliances,  excepting  locomotives  and  machines 
that  are  moved  so  frequently  that  they  are  provided  with 
trailing  cables — there  shall  be  provided  and  available  an  in- 
sulated platform  or  mat,  which  may  be  of  a form  and  char- 
acter most  in  keeping  with  the  circumstances  of  its  use,  and 
which  shall  be  not  less  effective  than  a dry  board  3 feet  by  15 
inches  by  % inch. 

10.  All  metallic  frames,  casings  and  coverings,  except 
those  of  mining  machines  and  drills,  that  may  become  alive, 
shall  be  permanently  grounded.*  All  metallic  pipe-lines,  1000 
feet  or  over  in  the  interior  of  the  mine,  and  all  pipe-lines  lead- 
ing outside  shall  be  bonded  to  the  return  at  ends  and  at 
intervals  not  exceeding  500  feet.  All  metallic  pipes  in  shafts 
shall  be  bonded  to  the  return  at  top  and  bottom  of  shafts. 

11.  Where  danger  exists  of  accidental  contact  with  wires 
carrying  electric  current,  the  wiring  shall  be  protected.  In 
haulage  roads  used  as  traveling  ways  the  wires  need  not  be 

*It  is  assumed  that  the  ordinary  conditions  of  operation  of  locomotives 
fulfill  the  requirement  of  this  rule. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


79 


protected,  if  a traveling  way  of  approved  dimensions  is  pro- 
vided on  the  side  of  the  entry  opposite  from  the  wires.  Where 
wires  are  run  in  an  entry,  in  which  no  one  but  authorized  per- 
sons are  allowed  to  travel,  or  where  no  hazard  from  contact 
exists,  the  wires  need  not  be  protected. 

12.  Weather-proof  varnished  cloth,  rubber,  or  similar  in- 
sulation, unless  inclosed  in  a metallic  sheath,  when  used 
underground  will  not  be  considered  as  a protection  against 
shock. 

13.  In  unfrequented  places  where  the  roof  is  likely  to  fall, 
all  electrical  conductors  shall  be  especially  protected  from 
injury  by  falling  roof. 

Carrying  Capacity  of  Conductors 

14.  The  carrying  capacity  of  insulated  conductors  of  dis- 
tributing circuits  shall  be  determined  by  reference  to  the  table 
of  carrying  capacities  laid  down  in  the  National  Electric 
Code. 

The  carrying  capacity  of  bare  conductors  shall  be  deter- 
mined by  reference  to  Table  1,  following: 

CURRENT-CARRYING  CAPACITY  OF  BARE  COPPER  CONDUCTORS 

USED  IN  MINES 


Size  of 


con- 

Current 

Size  of 

Current 

Size  of 

Current 

ductor 

capacity 

conductor 

capacity 

conductor 

capacity 

B.  & S. 

gauge 

Amperes 

Circular  mils 

Amperes 

Circular  mils 

Amperes 

10 

80 

250,000 

690 

750,000 

1,520 

8 

105 

300,000 

790 

800,000 

1,590 

6 

145 

350,000 

880 

850,000 

1,660 

4 

210 

400,000 

965 

900,000 

1,730 

2 

280 

450,000 

1,050 

950,000 

1,800 

1 

320 

500,000 

1,140 

1,000,000 

1,870 

0 

375 

550,000 

1,215 

00 

435 

600,000 

1,285 

000 

525 

650,000 

1,370 

0000 

615 

700,000 

1,450 

Use  of  Permissible  Equipment 

15.  The  decision  as  to  where  and  when  permissible  equip- 
ment is  required  will  be  made  from  time  to  time  as  necessary 
by  the  properly  constituted  State  authority.  The  term  equip- 
ment as  here  used  includes  everything  in  the  electric  circuit. 

See  also  rules  14,  112,  124,  132,  136,  138,  140,  141,  144  and 


80 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Inspection  and  Maintenance 

16.  At  each  mine  where  electricity  is  used  underground, 
a systematic  inspection  of  all  wiring  and  equipment  shall  be 
made  at  regular  intervals,  at  least  once  every  month.  A 
report  of  each  inspection  shall  be  made  by  the  mine  electrician 
or  inspector,  and  a copy  of  this  report  shall  be  furnished  to 
the  man  legally  in  charge  of  the  operation  of  the  mine  and 
kept  on  file  at  the  mine.  The  report  shall  definitely  state 
the  condition  of  each  underground  station,  of  the  conductors 
and  controlling  appliances  of  each  main  and  branch,  power 
and  lighting  circuit,  and  of  the  motors  and  controlling  appli- 
ances of  each  locomotive,  mining  machine,  pump,  hoist,  or 
other  piece  of  electrical  apparatus  connected  to  the  electrical 
system  of  the  mine. 

Notices  and  Warnings 

17.  Caution  notices  shall  be  posted  at  points  where  such 
warnings  will  be  most  effective  in  reducing  the  likelihood  of 
contact,  and  prohibitory  notices  shall  be  posted  wherever  elec- 
trical apparatus  that  should  not  be  manipulated  by  unauthor- 
ized persons  is  installed. 

Instruction  for  Resuscitation 

18.  There  shall  be  posted  prominently  in  every  surface 
and  underground  station  and  at  the  entrance  to  the  mine, 
instructions  for  the  restoration  of  persons  suffering  from 
electric  shock. 

All  employees  who  work  with  or  on  electrical  apparatus 
must  know  how  to  carry  out  these  instructions  without  delay. 

Plan  of  Electrical  System 

19.  A plan  shall  be  kept  at  the  mine  showing  the  position 
of  all  permanently  installed  electrical  machinery  and  appara- 
tus in  connection  with  the  mine  electrical  system,  including 
cables,  conductors,  lights,  motors,  switches,  trolley  lines  and 
transformers.  The  plan  shall  be  of  sufficient  size  to  show 
clearly  the  location  of  such  apparatus,  and  the  scale  shall  be 
not  less  than  200  feet  per  inch.  There  shall  be  stated  on  the 
plan  the  capacity  in  horse-power  or  kilowatts  of  each  motor 
and  transformer,  and  the  nature  of  its  duty.  Such  plan  shall 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


81 


be  corrected  as  often  as  may  be  necessary  to  keep  it  up  to  date, 
at  intervals  not  exceeding  six  months. 

Fire  Protection 

20.  Buckets  filled  with  clean,  dry  sand  shall  be  kept  in 
all  underground  stations  for  immediate  use  in  extinguishing 
fires.  The  minimum  amount  of  sand  thus  stored  in  any  one 
station  shall  not  be  less  than  2 cubic  feet.  No  sand  will  be 
required  if  two  or  more  approved  fire  extinguishers  are  kept 
in  each  station. 

DIVISION  2.— SURFACE  AND  UNDERGROUND  STATIONS, 
GENERATING  STATIONS  AND  SURFACE  SUB-STATIONS 

General  Rules  of  Safety 

See  Rules  8 to  11,  inclusive. 

Generators 

21.  Generators  shall  be  installed  upon  adequate  founda-  * 
tions  in  a dry  place,  free  from  explosive  vapors  or  flammable 
material. 

22.  Machines  generating  a voltage  shall  have  their  out- 
going leads  and  connections  entirely  within  the  generator 
frame  or  bed-plate,  or  protected  by  an  approved  guard. 
Switchboards  and  Controlling  Appliances 

See  Rules  36  to  42,  inclusive. 

ELECTRICALLY-DRIVEN  VENTILATING  FAN:  HOUSING, 
POWER  SUPPLY,  AND  ATTENDANT 

Fireproof  Buildings 

23.  All  electrically-driven  mine-ventilating  fans,  together 
with  the  housing  of  the  motor,  shall  be  built  of  fireproof  mate- 
rials. Underground  electric  fans  shall  not  be  used  where  the 
air  current  contains  gas  or  coal  dust  in  explosive  mixtures, 
and  when  used  the  surroundings  shall  be  fireproofed  within  a 
radius  of  15  feet  from  the  motor,  unless  this  has  a permissible 
casing. 

Power  Supply 

24.  If  the  line  supplying  the  power  is  exposed  to  the  influ- 
ence of  lightning,  lightning  arresters  shall  be  placed  near  the 
point  where  the  wires  enter  the  fan-house. 


82  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

25.  The  fan  attendant  shall  report  immediately  any  stop- 
page of  the  fan  to  the  man  legally  in  charge  of  the  operation 
of  the  mine,  and  means  for  direct  communication  between  the 
fan-house  and  generating  station  or  sub-station  supplying  the 
power  shall  be  provided. 

Attendant 

26.  The  responsibility  for  the  operation  of  electrically- 
driven  mine-ventilating  fans  shall  devolve  upon  an  authorized 
person. 

ELECTRICAL  EQUIPMENT  ON  TIPPLES  AND  OTHER 
SURFACE  STRUCTURES 

27.  All  electrical  equipment  on  tipples  and  other  surface 
structures  shall  be  installed  in  accordance  with  the  rules  of 
the  National  Board  of  Fire  Underwriters. 

28.  Starters  of  motors  on  tipples  shall  be  provided  with  a 
no-voltage  release,  and  if  practicable,  shall  be  located  within 
sight  of  the  motors  that  they  control  or  the  machines  that 
they  operate.  A switch  or  other  means  for  disconnecting  the 
motor  from  the  power  supply  shall  be  installed  near  the 
machinery. 


UNDERGROUND  STATIONS 
General  Rules  of  Safety 

See  also  Rules  8 to  11,  inclusive;  also  Rule  20. 

29.  All  underground  stations  shall  be  fireproof  and  well 
ventilated  with  fresh  air,  and  shall  be  wired  in  accordance 
with  the  requirements  of  the  National  Board  of  Fire  Under- 
writers. 

30.  Ventilation  may  be  accomplished  through  openings 
in  the  walls,  but  with  the  exception  of  underground  stations 
in  which  only  switches  are  installed,  the  openings  shall 
be  provided  with  non-combustible  doors  which  will  either 
close  automatically  in  case  of  fire,  or  can  be  closed  easily  from 
outside  the  room  by  the  attendant. 

Transformer-Stations 

See  also  “Underground  Transformers”  and  Rules  30,  36  to 
42,  inclusive;  84  and  85. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


83 


31.  Transformer-stations  shall  be  so  arranged  that  if  a 
transformer  explodes  the  oil  will  not  flow  outside  the  room. 

32.  Wires  shall  be  carried  on  non-combustible  supporting 
framework,  and  the  use  of  wood  shall  be  entirely  eliminated. 
The  supporting  framework  shall  be  grounded. 

33.  All  transformers  in  excess  of  50-kilowatt  capacity 
shall  be  equipped  with  suitable  ammeters  in  either  the  pri- 
mary or  secondary  circuits,  or  have  provision  for  connecting 
portable  instruments  into  such  circuits. 

Pump-Stations 

See  also  Rules  50  to  72,  inclusive. 

34.  Pump-motors  operating  at  voltages  exceeding  the  lim- 
its of  low  voltage  shall  be  wired  inside  the  pump-station,  with 
approved  wires  carried  in  conduit  sealed  to  exclude  moisture, 
or  sheathed  with  lead  and  so  placed  or  protected  as  to  avoid 
mechanical  injury.  The  metallic  covering  shall  be  perma- 
nently grounded. 

Battery  Charging-  Station 
See  also  Rules  29  and  30. 

35.  For  ventilating  battery  charging-stations,  means  shall 
be  provided  for  obtaining  the  air  from  the  intake  ways  and 
discharging  same  to  the  returning  air-way. 

Hoist  Stations 

See  “General  Rules  of  Safety  for  Underground  Stations,” 
Rule  34,  and  Rules  50  to  72. 

DIVISION  3.— MACHINES  AND  APPARATUS 
General  Rules  of  Safety 
See  Rules  3 to  6. 

Switchboards 

See  also  Rules  60  to  72  and  75  to  85. 

36.  Switchboards  shall  consist  of  a substantial  frame- 
work of  iron  pipe,  or  structural  steel,  on  which  shall  be 
mounted  a panel  or  panels  of  non-combustible,  non-absorbent, 
insulating  material  which  is  mechanically  strong,  and  has 
insulating  qualities  suitable  for  the  voltage  at  which  it  is 


84  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

used.  All  switchboard  mountings,  instrument  transformers 
and  motor  casings  shall  be  grounded. 

37.  The  panels  of  insulating  material  may  be  omitted  if 
each  piece  of  equipment  carried  on  the  switchboard  is  pro- 
vided with  an  individual  base  of  insulating  material  of  the 
character  specified  for  the  panels  and  of  adequate  dimensions, 
or  has  its  current-carrying  parts  mounted  on  approved  insu- 
lation self-contained  in  the  equipment,  which  shall  be  especially 
designed  for  mounting  on  iron  pipe  or  structural-steel  frame- 
work. 

38.  Switchboards  shall  be  so  placed  that  there  should  be  a 
straight  passageway  of  not  less  than  3 ft.  in  front  and  in  back 
of  the  switchboard.  These  3-ft.  passageways  shall  be  clear 
of  all  apparatus  mounted  on  the  board  and  shall  be  kept  free 
of  all  obstructions.  The  space  back  of  the  switchboards  shall 
be  provided  with  3-ft.  exits  at  both  ends,  but  shall  not  be 
entered  by  an  unauthorized  person,  and  shall  not  be  used  for 
the  storage  of  material  or  clothing. 

39.  The  space  behind  switchboards  where  the  voltage  ex- 
ceeds low  voltage  shall  be  kept  closed  by  locked  doors,  which 
can  be  opened  from  within  without  the  use  of  a key,  but  from 
without  with  the  key  only. 

40.  Where  the  voltage  of  the  power  supply  exceeds  the 
limits  of  medium  voltage,  the  live  high-voltage  metal-work 
on  the  front  of  the  switchboard  within  7 ft.  of  the  floor  shall 
be  protected.  In  case  of  existing  installations  that  do  not 
meet  the  requirements  with  this  respect  to  passage  space  in 
back  of  the  switchboard,  no  person  shall  be  permitted  back 
of  the  board  while  any  apparatus  or  circuits  connected  there- 
with are  alive. 

41.  Conductors  shall  not  cross  the  passageways  back  of 
switchboards  except  below  the  floor  or  at  a height  of  6V2  ft. 
above  the  floor. 

42.  There  shall  be  provided  for  each  generator  an  indi- 
cating ammeter  or  wattmeter  of  suitable  capacity,  and  for  all 
generators  a voltmeter,  that,  by  closing  a switch  or  manipu- 
lating a plug  connection,  can  be  connected  to  any  generator. 


THE  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


85 


ELECTRIC  VENTILATING  FAN  EQUIPMENT 
Housing  and  Power  Supply 

See  Rules  23  to  25. 

Capacity  of  Motors 

43.  Motors  that  operate  ventilating  fans  shall  be  of  suf- 
ficient capacity  to  drive  the  fan  at  the  maximum  speed  of  the 
motor  under  normal  conditions  of  service  without  overloading. 

Control  of  Motors 

44.  Non-automatic  motor-controlling  appliances,  which 
are  used  with  motors  that  are  not  self-starting,  shall  be  so 
arranged  that  the  motor  will  be  disconnected  automatically 
from  the  supply  circuit  in  case  the  power  supply  fails. 

ELECTRIC  HOISTING  EQUIPMENT 

Shaft  Hoists 

45.  All  electrically-operated  shaft  hoists  shall  be  pro- 
vided with  a device  approved  for  the  prevention  of  over- 
winding. Where  the  hoist  is  used  for  handling  men,  addi- 
tional provision  shall  be  made  to  prevent  overwinding  at  the 
man  landing.  Where  a separate  overwind  protection  for  men 
is  used  a visual  signal  shall  be  provided  to  indicate  at  all  man 
landings  that  the  overwind  device  is  set  for  hoisting  men.  It 
shall  not  be  possible  to  operate  the  signal  lights  without  set- 
ting the  man  landing  overwind. 

46.  Shaft  hoists  shall  have  a brake  which  will  keep  the 
hoisting  drum  under  the  control  of  the  operator.  The  brake 
shall  be  provided  with  an  automatic  trip  or  release,  which 
will  apply  the  brake  in  case  the  power  supply  fails,  in  case 
of  overwinding  or  overspeeding,  and  this  brake  shall  have 
sufficient  capacity  to  hold  the  maximum  unbalanced  load. 

47.  Hoists  for  handling  men  shall  be  so  arranged  that, 
when  hoisting  and  lowering  men  and  the  legal  rate  of  speed 
is  exceeded,  the  hoist  will  automatically  be  brought  to  a stop. 
If  hoists  are  designed  to  operate  in  balance,  the  driving  motor 
shall  be  of  sufficient  size  to  hoist  full  loads  of  men  in  a maxi- 
mum unbalanced  condition  in  case  of  emergency. 

48.  All  electric  safety  devices  shall  be  tested  at  the  begin- 


86 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


ning  of  each  shift  and  a record  of  such  tests  shall  be  made 
and  signed  by  an  authorized  person  and  kept  on  file  at  the 
mine. 

Slope  Hoists 

49.  All  electrically-operated  slope,  tail-rope,  or  endless- 
rope  hoists  in  mines  shall  be  fitted  with  adequate  controlling 
devices  of  approved  design. 

UNDERGROUND  MOTORS  OTHER  THAN  LOCOMOTIVES 

See  Rules  3 to  7 and  “General  Rules  for  Safety  for  Under- 
ground Stations,”  and  Rule  34. 

General  Construction 

50.  Motors  for  use  in  damp  places  shall  have  approved 
moisture-resisting  insulation. 

51.  The  outgoing  leads  and  connections  of  all  motors  shall 
be  protected  from  accidental  contact  by  insulation  or  grounded 
coverings.  Motors  that  operate  at  voltages  exceeding  low 
voltage  shall  have  their  outgoing  leads  and  connections 
entirely  within  the  motor-frame  or  bed-plates,  or  protected  by 
an  approved  guard. 

Permissible  Motors 

52.  See  Permissible  Equipment,  paragraph  15. 

Portable  Motors 

53.  The  motors  and  controlling  appliances  of  portable 
pumps,  hoists,  and  similar  portable  apparatus  shall  be  securely 
mounted  and  with  frame  grounded  to  a common  base  with  the 
machine  that  is  to  be  operated.  All  wiring  between  the  motor 
and  the  controlling  appliances  shall  be  done  in  accordance 
with  paragraph  7. 

54.  Mining-machine  motors,  and  other  motors  that  use 
a trailing  cable,  shall  be  provided  where  the  cable  enters  the 
frame  of  the  machine  with  an  approved  means  for  preventing 
abrasion  of  the  insulating  covering  of  the  cable.  An  ap- 
proved insulating  clamp  placed  within  the  frame,  or  protected 
by  an  approved  metallic  covering,  shall  be  provided  for  tak- 
ing all  mechanical  strains  upon  the  cable  terminals.  (See 
also  Rule  55.) 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


87 


Trailing  Cables 

55.  Trailing  cables  for  portable  machines  shall  be  especi- 
ally flexible,  heavily  insulated,  and  protected  with  extra  stout 
braiding,  hose  pipes,  or  other  effective  coverings.  (See  also 
Rule  74.) 

56.  Each  trailing  cable  in  use  shall  be  examined  daily  by 
the  machine  operator  for  abrasion  and  other  defects;  and  he 
shall  also  be  required  to  observe  carefully  the  trailing  cable 
while  in  use,  and  shall  at  once  repair  any  defect  or  report  it  to 
the  person  in  charge  of  electrical  equipment. 

57.  In  the  event  of  the  trailing  cable  in  service  breaking 
down  or  becoming  damaged  in  any  way,  or  any  person  receiv- 
ing a shock  from  it,  it  shall  be  at  once  put  out  of  service.  The 
faulty  cable  shall  not  again  be  used  until  it  has  been  repaired 
and  tested  by  an  authorized  person. 

58.  The  trailing  cable  shall  be  divided  at  the  motor,  but 
only  for  such  length  as  is  necessary  for  making  connection  to 
the  motor;  and  the  cable,  with  its  outer  covering  complete, 
shall  be  clamped  securely  to  the  motor-frame  in  such  a man- 
ner as  to  protect  the  cable  from  injury,  and  to  prevent  any 
mechanical  strain  being  borne  by  the  signal  ends  that  make 
electric  connection  to  the  motor. 

Permissible  Portable  Motors 

59.  See  Permissible  Equipment,  paragraph  15. 

Control 

60.  Every  stationary  motor  and  every  portable  motor  used 
underground,  except  mining  machines  and  drills,  shall  be 
protected,  together  with  its  starting  device. 

Direct-Current  Motors 

61.  On  two-wire  ungrounded  circuits,  each  wire  shall  be 
protected  by  an  automatic  circuit-breaker,  or  by  a fuse  and 
switch.  On  two-wire  grounded  circuits,  the  ungrounded  wire 
shall  be  protected  by  a switch,  and  either  a fuse  or  an  auto- 
matic circuit-breaker.  When  the  circuit-breaker  trips  free 
from  the  closing  handle,  the  switch  may  be  omitted.  On  three- 
wire  circuits  each  outside  wire  shall  be  protected  by  a fuse 
or  automatic  circuit-breaker,  but  no  fuse  or  automatic  circuit- 


88 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


breaker  shall  be  used  in  the  neutral  wire.  A triple-pole  switch,, 
to  isolate  the  fuses  or  circuit-breakers  from  live  source,  shall 
be  used.  In  case  circuit-breakers  are  used,  they  shall  be  so 
arranged  that  the  opening  of  the  circuit-breaker  in  one  wire 
will  cause  the  other  circuit-breakers  to  trip. 

Alternating-Current  Motors 

62.  On  three-phase  delta  or  Y (star)  connected  circuits, 
each  wire  shall  be  provided  with  a fuse  or  automatic  circuit- 
breaker.  When  circuit-breakers  are  used,  two  overload  trip- 
coils  shall  be  used  for  underground  neutral  systems,  and  three 
overload  trip-coils  for  grounded  neutral  systems.  In  either 
case  the  automatic  circuit-breakers  shall  be  so  arranged  that 
the  opening  of  one  will  open  the  others.  Switches  for  iso- 
lating the  fuses  or  circuit-breakers  from  live  source  shall  be 
provided.  When  air-brake  circuit-breakers,  which  trip  free 
from  the  handle  are  used,  the  switch  may  be  omitted. 

63.  The  above  devices  shall  be  installed  in  a convenient 
position  in  sight  of  the  motor  or  in  sight  of  the  equipment 
that  the  motor  operates.  The  controlling  appliances  of  sta- 
tionary motors,  except  the  controllers  of  hoist  and  similar 
equipment,  shall  be  mounted  upon  a switchboard.  Resistances 
may  be  mounted  upon  a separate  metallic  framework. 

64.  Underground  motors  that  operate  care  or  coal-handling 
equipment  shall  be  provided  at  a point  near  such  equipment 
with  a switch,  or  other  means  for  disconnecting  the  motor 
from  the  power  supply. 

65.  Underground  motors  used  to  drive  booster  or  auxili- 
ary fans  shall  be  so  designed  or  equipped  that  they  will  start 
automatically,  when  their  circuits  are  connected  to  the  power 
supply. 

66.  All  non-automatic,  current-limiting  starting  devices, 
except  those  used  with  mining  machines,  drills,  locomotives, 
and  hoists,  shall  be  provided  with  a no-voltage  release. 

67.  Electrically-operated  mining  machines  and  drills  may 
be  protected  by  a single  fuse,  and  need  not  be  equipped  with 
a line-switch  if  an  approved  current-rupturing  device  is  in- 
stalled at  that  end  of  the  trailing  cable  which  is  nearest  to 
the  power  supply.  If  a hook  is  used  for  this  purpose  it  shall 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


89 


be  provided  with  an  insulated  handle  of  approved  construc- 
tion. If  cable  reels  are  used,  they  shall  be  provided  with  an 
approved  means  for  opening  the  circuit  under  full  motor  load. 
(See  Rule  15.) 

68.  All  insulating  material  used  in  connection  with  start- 
ing resistances  shall  be  non-combustible.  This  includes  the 
insulation  of  wire  used  for  the  internal  wiring  of  resistances. 

69.  All  switches  shall  be  so  installed  that  they  can  not  close 
by  gravity. 

70.  Every  underground  stationary  motor  of  100  brake 
horse-power  or  over  shall  be  provided  with  a suitable  meter 
to  indicate  the  amount  of  load  on  the  machine. 

71.  All  wiring  between  motors  and  their  controlling  ap- 
pliances shall  be  insulated. 

72.  Overload  release  devices  on  starting  rheostats  and 
compensators  will  not  be  considered  as  taking  the  place  of 
circuit-breakers,  if  such  devices  are  inoperative  during  the 
-starting  of  the  motor.  If  automatic  starting  devices  are  used 
they  shall  be  inclosed  in  a fireproof  inclosure,  or  mounted 
upon  a metallic  framework  clear  of  all  combustible  material. 

LOCOMOTIVES 

73.  Gathering  locomotives  may  be  operated  with  a single- 
conductor  trailing  cable  if  the  track  provides  a good  metallic 
return:  otherwise  double-conductor  trailing  cable  must  be 
used. 

74.  The  trailing  cable  of  gathering  locomotives  shall  be 
provided  with  an  approved  insulated  hook  or  other  device  for 
making  connection  to  the  trolley  wire;  and  if  a double-con- 
ductor cable  is  used  a similar  hook  or  device  shall  be  provided 
for  making  connection  to  the  track  rail. 

UNDERGROUND  TRANSFORMERS 

See  ‘‘Underground  Stations.”  “Transformer  Stations”  and 
Rules  84  and  85. 


90  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

DIVISION  4.— CIRCUITS  AND  CONDUCTORS 
PROTECTION  AND  CONTROL 

Protection  of  all  Circuits 

75.  All  circuits  leading  from  generating  stations  and  sub- 
stations, except  transformer  sub-stations,  shall  be  provided 
at  their  source  with  current-interrupting  devices  of  such  capa- 
cities, and  so  installed  and  adjusted  that  the  circuit  will  be 
opened  if  the  current  in  the  circuit  exceeds  the  carrying  capa- 
city of  the  conductors  leaving  the  station.  All  circuits  lead- 
ing underground  exceeding  50  kilowatts  capacity  shall  be  pro- 
vided with  a suitable  ammeter  or  means  for  inserting  a port- 
able ammeter. 

76.  Two-wire  ungrounded  direct-current  circuits  shall  be 
protected  by  an  automatic  circuit-breaker  or  by  a fuse  and 
switch  in  each  wire.  Two-wire  grounded  direct-current  cir- 
cuits shall  be  protected  by  a switch,  and  either  an  automatic 
circuit-breaker  or  a fuse  in  the  ungrounded  wire.  When  the 
circuit-breaker  trips  free  from  the  closing  handle  the  switch 
may  be  omitted.  Three-wire  ungrounded  direct-current  cir- 
cuits shall  be  protected  by  a fuse  or  automatic  circuit-breaker 
in  each  outside  conductor,  but  no  fuse  or  circuit-breaker  in 
the  neutral  conductor,  and  in  addition  a triple-pole  switch  to 
isolate  the  fuse  or  circuit-breaker  from  live  sources.  Where 
one  of  the  outside  wires  is  grounded,  this  should  be  treated  as 
neutral  and  protection  provided  only  in  the  other  two  wires. 

77.  Three-phase  delta  or  Y (star)  connected  alternating- 
current  circuits  shall  be  protected  by  a fuse  or  an  automatic 
circuit-breaker  in  each  wire.  When  automatic  circuit-break- 
ers are  used,  two  overload  trip-coils  shall  be  provided  for 
ungrounded  neutral  systems,  and  three  overload  trip-coils  for 
grounded  neutral  systems.  In  either  case  the  automatic  cir- 
cuit-breakers shall  be  so  arranged  that  the  opening  of  one  will 
open  the  others.  Switches  for  isolating  the  fuses  or  circuit- 
breakers  from  live  sources  shall  be  provided. 

Protection  of  Circuits  Leading  Underground 

78.  Each  outgoing  circuit  that  leads  underground,  and 
extends  over  the  surface  of  the  ground  500  ft.  or  more  from 
the  generating  station  or  sub-station,  shall  be  equipped  with 
lightning  arresters  of  approved  type,  with  proper  ground  con- 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


91 


nection  at  the  generating  station  or  sub-station,  and  also  at 
the  point  where  the  circuit  enters  the  mine. 

79.  Lightning  arresters  shall  be  connected  on  the  second- 
ary side  of  all  transformers  that  feed  underground  circuits, 
unless  there  is  provided  other  suitable  means  for  discharging 
abnormal  voltages.  Lightning  arresters  on  the  primary  side 
will  be  considered  suitable  if  the  secondary  circuit  above 
ground  is  less  than  50  ft.  long. 

80.  Each  power  circuit  leading  underground  shall  be  pro- 
vided with  a disconnecting  switch  in  each  conductor  capable 
of  opening  the  circuit  under  load.  This  switch  shall  be  placed 
where  the  circuit  enters  the  mine  or  within  100  ft.  of  this 
point. 

81.  Each  individual  circuit  leading  underground,  whether 
alternating  or  direct  current,  shall  be  provided  with  automatic 
overload  protection  at  or  before  the  point  where  it  enters 
the  mine  working.  If  two  circuit-breakers  are  used,  they 
must  be  so  interlocked  that  both  will  open  in  the  event  of  one 
opening. 

Protection  of  Underground  Circuits 

82.  All  branch  circuits  of  a network  shall  be  provided 
with  current-rupturing  devices  of  such  capacity,  and  so  in- 
stalled, that  the  current  in  any  part  of  the  branch  circuit  can- 
not exceed  the  carrying  capacity  of  that  part  as  defined  by 
Rule  14,  if  the  length  of  the  complete  branch  circuit  exceeds 
two  miles. 

83.  Minimum  size  of  conductors  used  to  supply  power  to 
eoal-cutting  equipment  shall  be  No.  4 B.  & S.  Minimum  size 
of  conductors  for  supplying  pumps  shall  be  No.  8 B.  & S.  All 
conductors  supplying  pumps  and  motors  shall  come  within 
the  limits  given  under  paragraph  14. 

Protection  of  Underground  Transformer  Circuits 

84.  All  transformers  shall  be  equipped  with  automatic 
current-interrupting  devices  in  at  least  the  primary  side  of 
the  transformer;  and  also  in  the  secondary  side  of  the  trans- 
former, if  the  current-interrupting  devices  in  the  primary 
are  not  readily  accessible  from  the  transformer. 


92 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


85.  When  the  voltage  of  circuits  entering  or  leaving  under- 
ground transformers  exceeds  the  limits  of  medium  voltage, 
current-interrupting  devices  shall  consist  of  an  oil  circuit- 
breaker  in  each  conductor,  and  each  switch  shall  be  provided 
with  an  automatic  overload-trip. 

86.  When  the  voltage  of  circuits  entering  or  leaving  trans- 
formers does  not  exceed  the  limits  of  medium  voltage,  their 
protective  devices  may  consist  of  an  oil  circuit-breaker  as 
described  above,  or  of  a knife-switch  and  automatic  circuit- 
breaker  in  each  conductor,  except  that  approved  fuses  may  be 
substituted  for  circuit-breakers. 

INSTALLING  OF  SURFACE  CIRCUITS 
Surface  Transmission-Lines 

87.  Power  wires  shall  not  be  placed  on  the  same  cross- 
arms  with  telegraph,  telephone,  or  signal  wires.  When  placed 
on  the  same  pole  with  such  wires  and  below  them,  the  distance 
between  the  two  inside  pins  of  each  cross-arm  carrying  power 
wires  shall  not  be  less  than  26  inches. 

88.  Transmission-lines  operating  at  voltages  in  excess  of 
5000  volts  shall  not  be  placed  on  the  same  poles  with  tele- 
phone circuits  which  are  or  can  be  connected  underground, 
unless  the  telephone  lines  are  provided  with  approved  protec- 
tive devices  capable  of  preventing  the  higher  voltage  from 
entering  the  underground  telephone  circuits. 

Surface  Trolley-Lines 

89.  All  surface  trolley-lines  shall  be  kept  at  least  6V2  ft. 
above  the  top  of  the  rail,  and  shall  be  protected  at  all  regularly 
provided  crossings  by  a guard,  which  will  prevent  men  from 
coming  in  contact  with  the  wire  either  directly  or  by  bringing 
tools  in  contact  with  the  wire. 

90.  That  part  of  the  trolley  circuit  used  for  surface  opera- 
tions shall  be  so  arranged  that  it  can  be  entirely  disconnected 
from  the  power  supply  without  cutting  off  the  current  inside 
of  the  mine,  or  interfering  with  the  operation  of  other  appara- 
tus not  a part  of  the  trolley  system. 

91.  Trolley-wires  shall  not  be  smaller  than  No.  8 B.  & S. 
gauge  copper  wire  or  No.  4 B.  & S.  gauge  silicon-bronze  wire, 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


93 


and  shall  withstand  easily  the  strain  put  upon  them  when  in 
use: 

92.  Trolley  wires  shall  have  double  insulation  from  the 
ground  unless  an  approved  single  insulator  is  used.  In 
wooden-pole  construction  the  pole  will  be  considered  as  one 
insulation. 

METHODS  OF  CARRYING  CIRCUITS  UNDERGROUND 
Suspension  in  Shafts 

93.  All  power  conductors  installed  in  shafts  shall  be  cov- 
ered with  approved  insulating  material  throughout  or  pro- 
tected in  an  approved  manner,  and  shall  be  firmly  fastened 
to  or  suspended  from  properly  supported  insulators,  unless 
the  conductors  are  sheathed  with  lead  or  inclosed  in  conduit. 
Conductors  used  as  returns  in  shafts  for  ground-return  sys- 
tems shall  be  supported  on  insulators,  but  need  not  be  covered 
with  insulation. 

94.  Shaft  cables  which  are  so  constructed  that  the  whole  or 
any  part  of  the  cable  is  not  self-sustaining,  shall  be  supported 
in  an  approved  manner  at  such  intervals  as  may  be  necessary 
to  prevent  the  occurrence  of  undue  strains  in  sheath,  insula- 
tion, or  conductors. 

95.  Shaft  cables  shall  be  so  placed  or  protected  that  they 
are  not  liable  to  injury  from  falling  material. 

Suspension  in  Bore-Holes 

96.  All  power  conductors,  except  grounded  returns  in- 
stalled in  bore-holes,  shall  be  covered  with  insulation  and  sup- 
ported in  an  approved  manner,  which  shall  prevent  the  occur- 
rence of  undue  strains  in  sheath,  insulation  or  conductors. 

97.  Telephone  or  signal  wires  shall  not  be  installed  in  the 
same  bore-hole  with  power  wires,  unless  either  the  signal  or 
the  power  conductors  in  the  bore-hole  are  encased  in  metallic 
coverings  that  are  permanently  grounded. 

Entrance  of  Conductors  Through  Drifts  or  Slopes 

98.  Low  and  medium-voltage  power  conductors  in  drifts 
or  slopes  may  be  installed  bare,  but  shall  be  carried  on  suit- 
able insulators  securely  fastened  to  the  sides  or  roof  of  the 


94 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


entry.  If  the  drift  or  slope  is  used  for  traveling,  the  con- 
ductors shall  be  protected  as  required  in  Rule  105. 

• 

INSTALLATION  OF  UNDERGROUND  POWER  CIRCUITS 
AND  CONDUCTORS 

99.  All  joints  in  wires  shall  be  made  electrically  and  me- 
chanically efficient  either  by  the  use  of  an  approved  mechan- 
ical connector  or  by  soldering. 

100.  Underground  conductors  will  not  be  considered  as 
shock-proof  unless  they  are  encased  in  metallic  covering  that 
is  thoroughly  grounded. 

101.  Low  and  medium-voltage  conductors  shall  be  car- 
ried at  least  6 in.  from  the  trolley-line  and  on  the  nearest  rib 
side  of  it,  and  shall  be  supported  on  insulators  of  an  approved 
type.  When  the  height  of  the  entry  does  not  exceed  5 ft., 
the  insulators  shall  be  placed  not  more  than  20  ft.  apart  and 
as  much  closer  as  is  necessary  to  support  the  wires  properly. 

102.  If  the  height  of  the  entry  is  more  than  5 ft.,  the 
insulators  shall  be  placed  not  more  than  30  ft.  apart,  and  as 
much  closer  as  may  be  necessary  to  support  the  line  properly. 

103.  High-voltage  conductors  shall  be  carried  in  metallic 
coverings,  and  shall  be  installed  in  an  approved  manner  with 
special  reference  to  the  conditions  under  which  they  are  in- 
stalled. 

104.  The  negative  or  return  wire  of  grounded  systems  shall 
be  treated  in  exactly  the  same  menner  as  the  positive  or  live 
wire,  and  afforded  the  same  support  and  insulation. 

105.  All  conductors  in  traveling  ways,  except  haulage- 
roads  used  for  traveling  (see  Rule  11)  and  medium-voltage 
conductors  in  room  entries,  shall  be  protected  throughout 
that  part  of  the  entry  that  is  used  for  traveling,  unless  the 
conductors  are  at  least  6!/^  ft.  above  the  rail,  in  which  case 
protection  will  be  necessary  only  at  those  points  where  men 
are  required  to  ^work  beneath  the  conductors  or  pass  under 
them.  The  insulators  may  be  supported  directly  from  the 
roof  or  side  or  may  be  attached  to  timbers  not  less  than  3 by  4- 
inch  size,  or  may  be  secured  to  steel  mine  timbers.  The  in- 
sulators shall  be  placed  so  that  the  height  of  the  conductors 
above  the  bottom  will  be  comparatively  uniform. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


95 


106.  All  conductors  shall  be  strung  with  the  least  prac- 
ticable sag  between  the  supporting  insulators,  and  shall  be 
maintained  in  this  condition  and  kept  from  contact  with  rock, 
coal,  timber,  or  other  non-insulating  material. 

107.  All  main  conductors  shall  be  sectionalized  by  ap- 
proved switches  at  points  not  more  than  2500  ft.  apart. 

Branch  Conductors 

108.  Branch  conductors  shall  be  supported  and  main- 
tained in  the  same  manner  as  main  conductors,  and  given  the 
same  protection. 

109.  At  the  point  where  branch  circuits  leave  the  main 
circuits  there  shall  be  placed  a switch  for  cutting  off  all  cur- 
rent from  the  branch  circuits. 

110.  Where  wires  pass  through  partitions  or  wooden  or 
other  brattices,  they  shall  be  protected  with  approved  in- 
sulating tubes  held  in  place  with  tape  or  thoroughly  cemented 
in  place  so  that  they  can  not  move. 

111.  Entries  or  passageways  in  which  wires  are  installed 
must  be  kept  sufficiently  free  from  rock,  slate,  or  other  mate- 
rial to  permit  ready  access  to  the  wires  at  all  times. 

Room  Wiring* 

112.  Rooms  in  which  gas  or  coal  dust  exist  in  explosive 
mixtures  shall  not  be  wired.  Where  room  wiring  is  permis- 
sible it  shall  be  treated  as  branch  circuits,  and  equipped  at 
the  room  entrance  with  switches  or  some  other  device  that 
will  entirely  disconnect  the  wiring  when  not  in  use. 

Trolley-Wires 

113.  Trolley-wires  shall  be  of  hard-drawn  copper  not 
smaller  in  size  than  1/0  B.  & S.  gauge,  and  shall  be  securely 
supported  on  approved  hangers,  which  may  be  attached  di- 
rectly to  the  roof  or  securely  fastened  to  timber  or  equivalent. 

114.  The  height  of  trolley-wires  above  the  top  of  the  rail 
shall  be  made  as  uniform  as  practicable. 

115.  Trolley-wires  shall  be  so  placed  as  to  give  the  maxi- 
mum clearance  practicable,  and  kept  in  as  straight  a line  as 
possible. 


*The  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines  recommends  that  rooms  be  not  wired. 


96 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


116.  On  straight  runs,  the  hangers  shall  be  placed  not 
more  than  20  ft.  apart  where  the  height  of  the  roof  above  the 
track  is  5 ft.  or  less,  and  not  more  than  30  ft.  apart  where 
the  roof  is  more  than  5 ft.  above  the  track.  On  curves,  the 
hangers  shall  be  placed  so  close  together  that  the  trolley-wire 
at  any  one  hanger  may  be  entirely  disconnected  without  ex- 
posing the  locomotive  runner  to  danger  of  contact. 

117.  Underground  trolley-lines  shall  be  sectionalized  every 
2500  ft.  by  placing  in  the  line  a switch  by  which  the  line  can 
be  entirely  disconnected  from  the  power  supply.  All  branch 
trolley-lines  shall  be  provided  with  a frog  at  the  point  where 
they  leave  the  main,  and  also  with  a switch  installed  at  or 
near  the  frog,  by  which  the  branch  can  be  disconnected  from 
the  main. 

118.  Trolley- wires  that  are  less  than  6V2  ft.  above  the  top 
of  the  rail  shall  be  protected  at  all  points  where  men  are  regu- 
larly required  to  work  or  pass  under  them,  and  at  all  points 
where  men  may  come  in  contact  with  the  wires. 

Bonding 

119.  The  tracks  of  all  main  haulage  systems  that  use  a 
rail  return  shall  be  bonded  at  every  rail  joint,  and  cross  bond- 
ing shall  be  placed  at  intervals  not  exceeding  200  ft.  Special 
provision  shall  be  made  for  bonding  around  all  switches, 
frogs,  or  openings  in  the  track  so  as  to  insure  a continuous 
return. 

Lighting  Circuits  in  Places  Where  Gas  or  Coal  Dust  Do  Not  Occur 
in  Dangerous  Mixtures 

See  also  Rules  133  to  135 ; 137  to  139. 

120.  Lighting  wires  shall  be  attached  to  power  wires  by 
soldering  or  by  fastening  under  a set-screw  in  a lug  attached 
to  the  trolley-hanger,  or  by  such  other  devices  as  will  prevent 
the  wires  from  becoming  loose. 

121.  All  wiring  shall  be  supported  on  non-combustible, 
non-absorbent  insulators,  which  shall  separate  the  wires  by 
at  least  1 in.  from  the  surfaces  wired  over.  Wires  of  opposite 
polarity  shall  be  kept  at  least  21/2  in.  apart  for  low  voltage, 
and  5 in.  apart  for  medium  voltage. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


97 


122.  No  wires  smaller  than  No.  14  B.  & S.  gauge  shall  be 
used  for  lighting  circuits  in  non-gaseous  places. 

123.  When  the  ground  is  used  as  a return  for  lighting  cir- 
cuits, the  return  wire  shall  be  attached  to  the  track  by  bond- 
ing to  the  rail  or  by  attachment  to  regular  bonding  in  an  ap- 
proved manner.  This  ground  connection  shall  be  made  of  not 
less  than  No.  8 B.  & S.  gauge  copper  wire,  which  shall  be 
buried  below  the  surface  and  carried  to  the  side  of  the  entry, 
and  thence  on  porcelain  insulators  to  the  roof  or  a point  at 
least  5 ft.  above  the  track. 

Lighting  Circuits  in  Places  Where  Gas  or  Coal  Dust  Occurs  in 
Dangerous  Mixtures" 

See  also  Rules  136  and  140. 

124.  The  potential  of  lighting  circuits  shall  not  exceed 
the  limits  of  low  voltage. 

125.  Only  permissible  equipment  shall  be  used  for  light- 
ing circuits. 

126.  The  circuits  shall  be  run  from  the  outside,  with  all 
switches  and  protective  devices  on  the  surface,  or  by  using 
permissible  switches,  fuses,  or  circuit-breakers  situated 
underground,  or  by  ventilating  with  fresh  air  the  place  where 
the  switches  and  fuses  are  installed. 

127.  If  the  circuits  are  run  from  the  outside  with  the  con- 
trolling devices  installed  on  the  surface,  the  conductors  lead- 
ing underground  shall  be  not  smaller  than  No.  8 B.  & S. 
gauge,  and  each  circuit  shall  be  provided  above  ground  with 
a suitable  ammeter. 

128.  Each  circuit  shall  have  a double-pole  switch  and  fuses 
or  circuit-breakers  in  the  case  of  two-wire  systems,  and  a 
three-pole  switch  and  fuses  or  circuit-breakers  in  the  case  of 
three-wire  systems. 

129.  The  fuses  or  circuit-breakers  shall  be  designed  or 
arranged  to  operate  when  the  allowable  load  is  exceeded  by 
25%. 

*Bureau  of  Mines  recommends  that  in  mines  in  which  fire-damp  is 
given  off  in  dangerous  quantities,  the  use  of  lighting  circuits  be  confined 
to  those  entries  and  places  that  are  ventilated  by  intake  air-currents  which 
have  not  passed  by  or  through  abandoned  or  active  workings,  except  that 
a lighting  circuit  may  be  used  in  a shaft  or  slope  bottom  ventilated  by  a 
return  air-current  in  which  the  percentage  of  methane  does  not  exceed  1%. 


98 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


130.  No  wire  smaller  than  No.  12  B.  & S.  gauge  shall  be 
used  in  lighting  circuits  except  for  the  leads  of  weather- 
proof sockets,  and  these  shall  not  be  less  than  No.  14  B.  & S. 
gauge. 

131.  In  case  distribution  is  made  from  a point  under- 
ground, the  distribution  switches  and  fuses  shall  be  mounted 
on  a non-combustible  panel,  placed  in  a metal  cabinet  and 
fitted  with  a hinged  door.  This  cabinet  shall  be  used  whether 
permissible  switches  are  required  or  not.  The  cabinet  shall 
be  fitted  with  a door  properly  hinged,  so  that  it  will  close 
tightly  and  shall  be  provided  with  a fastening  which  will  hold 
the  door  securely  in  a closed  position. 

132.  Flexible  lamp-cord  connections  are  prohibited  except 
for  portable  lamps,  as  covered  by  Rule  141. 

DIVISION  5.— MISCELLANEOUS  EQUIPMENT 
FIXED  ELECTRIC  LAMPS 

For  wiring  and  control  requirements  of  fixed  electric  lamps, 
see  Rules  120  to  132,  inclusive. 

133.  Electric  lamps  used  to  illuminate  haulage-roads,  side 
tracks,  and  similar  passageways  where  gas  or  coal  dust  do 
not  exist  in  explosive  mixtures,  may  be  connected  to  power 
and  trolley-lines. 

134.  Lamps  may  be  connected  in  multiple  or  in  series,  and 
no  fuse  or  switch  will  be  required  for  one  lamp  or  series  of 
lamps.  A switch  may  be  used  if  it  is  desired  to  switch  the 
lamps  on  or  off,  and  a fuse  must  be  used  if  it  is  necessary 
to  protect  any  considerable  length  of  wire. 

135.  All  sockets  shall  be  of  the  keyless  weather-proof  type, 
and  have  no  exposed  metallic  parts.  Lead  wires  shall  be 
rubber-covered,  and  of  a size  not  smaller  than  No.  14  B.  & S. 
gauge.  The  lead  wires  shall  be  made  a part  of  the  socket 
and  permanently  connected  thereto.  These  wires  shall  be  at- 
tached directly  to  the  line  wires  by  soldering  or  by  mechanical 
connectors.  Sockets  shall  not  be  supported  by  the  lines  wires, 
but  by  an  additional  insulator  or  insulators,  or  some  other 
device  that  will  be  entirely  independent  of  the  line  wires. 

136.  In  mines  that  contain  gas  or  coal  dust  in  explosive 
mixtures,  and  in  which  electricity  is  used  only  for  lighting 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


99 


or  where  the  lighting  circuits  are  separate  from  the  power  cir- 
cuits, the  voltage  of  such  circuits  shall  not  exceed  the  limits 
of  low  voltage,  and  all  lamps  shall  be  connected  in  multiple. 

137.  Not  more  than  24  lamps  shall  be  attached  to  any  one 
circuit,  and  the  power  taken  by  any  one  circuit  shall  not  exceed 
1300  watts. 

138.  Permissible  mine  incandescent  lamps  shall  be  used 
where  gas  or  coal  dust  occurs  in  explosive  mixtures. 

139.  Incandescent  lamps  shall  be  so  installed  that  they 
cannot  come  in  contact  with  combustible  material. 

140.  Electric  lamps  shall  be  replaced  by  an  authorized  per- 
son only,  and  in  places  where  gas  or  coal  dust  exist  in  explo- 
sive mixtures,  only  after  an  examination  for  gas  has  been 
made  with  a safety-lamp. 

Portable  Electric  Lamps 

141.  Portable  incandescent  lamps,  other  than  permissible 
battery-lamps,  shall  be  protected  by  a heavy  wire  cage,  which 
completely  encloses  both  lamp  and  socket,  and  shall  be  pro- 
vided with  a handle  to  which  both  cage  and  socket  are  firmly 
attached,  and  through  which  the  cord  supplying  the  current  is 
carried.  The  socket  shall  be  keyless,  and  the  lamp  circuit  shall 
be  protected  by  a fuse. 

142.  When  a portable  lamp  is  one  of  several  connected  in 
series  between  a source  of  voltage  and  the  earth,  the  portable 
lamp  shall  be  the  one  in  the  series  electrically  nearest  to  the 
earth  connection. 

143.  The  use  of  portable  lamps  with  leads  of  ordinary 
flexible  cord  is  prohibited.  Only  lamp  cords  approved  for  this 
purpose  shall  be  used. 

Self-Contained  Portable  Electric  Lamps* 

144.  Permissible  self-contained  portable  electric  lamps 
shall  be  used  in  places  where  gas  or  coal  dust  occurs  in  ex- 
plosive mixtures. 

‘The  use  of  self-contained  portable  electric  lamps  of  suitable  design  and 
construction  is  recommended  for  all  coal  mines,  provided  that  in  places 
where  gas  or  coal  dust  occur  in  dangerous  mixtures,  or  in  places  where 
blackdamp  is  given  off  in  large  quantities,  frequent  inspections  with  safety- 
lamps  are  made. 


100  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Electric  Shot-Firing  Equipment 

145.  Electricity  from  any  grounded  circuit  shall  not  be 
used  for  firing  shots.f 

146.  Special  precautions  shall  be  taken  to  prevent  shot- 
firing conductors  from  becoming  grounded,  or  from  getting  in 
contact  with  other  electric  circuits. 

147.  Only  authorized  persons  shall  be  allowed  to  fire  shots 
with  electricity  in  a mine. 

148.  The  electric  detonators  or  igniters  and  leads  thereto 
shall  be  suitable  for  the  conditions  under  which  the  blasting  is 
carried  on  and  shall  be  approved  by  the  United  States  Bureau 
of  Mines. 

149.  Portable  shot-firing  machines  shall  be  of  efficient  de- 
sign and  shall  be  substantially  constructed.  All  such  machines 
shall  be  enclosed  in  strong,  tight  casings. 

150.  Primary  or  secondary  batteries  used  for  shot-firing 
shall  be  enclosed  in  a well-constructed  casing  provided  with  a 
special  form  of  contact-plug  for  making  the  connection  be- 
tween the  batteries  and  shot-firing  leads.  The  design  of  the 
plug  shall  be  such  that  considerable  pressure  will  be  required 
to  make  the  contact,  which  will  be  immediately  broken  unless 
the  plug  is  forcibly  held  in  position. 

151.  There  shall  be  no  exposed  contacts  on  the  outside  of 
the  battery  casings. 

152.  All  portable  shot-firing  machines  shall  be  equipped 
with  a detachable  handle,  connecting  plug,  key,  or  similar 
approved  device  without  which  the  shot-firing  circuit  cannot 
be  closed,  and  which  shall  under  no  circumstances  pass  from 
the  custody  of  the  person  authorized  to  fire  the  shots. 

153.  No  shot-firing  device  shall  be  connected  to  the  shot- 
firing leads  until  all  other  steps  preparatory  to  the  firing  of  the 
shot  have  been  completed,  and  all  persons  have  moved  to  a 
position  of  safety. 

Disconnection  of  Leads 

154.  Immediately  after  the  firing  of  a shot,  the  firing  lead? 

fit  is  recommended  that  all  shots  be  fired  electrically,  and  for  inside 
firing,  shots  be  fired  separately — and  one  at  a time,  on  account  of  the 
danger  ' »f  causing  blown-out  shots  and  resultant  explosions.  If  fired  in 
groups  he  firing  should  be  done  only  from  the  surface. 


UNDERGROUND  POWER  EQUIPMENT 


101 


shall  be  disconnected  from  the  supply  of  electricity,  and  no 
person  shall  aproach  a shot  which  electricity  has  failed  to  ex- 
plode until  the  firing  leads  have  been  so  disconnected,  and  an 
interval  of  10  minutes  has  elapsed  since  the  last  attempt  to  fire 
the  shot. 

Shot-Firing  From  Surface 

155.  In  coal  mines  employing  the  system  of  firing  shots 
electrically  from  above  ground  when  everyone  is  out  of  the 
mine,  a complete  metallic  circuit  shall  be  employed,  and  both 
wires  shall  be  covered  with  insulation  and  supported  upon 
glass  or  porcelain  insulators. 

156.  There  shall  be  a switch  at  the  mouth  of  each  working 
place,  so  that  the  circuit  can  be  kept  open  while  miners  are  at 
work,  and  closed  only  when  the  shots  have  been  prepared,  and 
the  miner  or  miners  are  leaving  the  place. 

157.  There  shall  be  a locked  switch  in  the  circuit  at  the 
entrance  to  each  heading  or  side  entry,  which  shall  be  locked 
open  and  be  thrown-in  only  by  an  authorized  person,  when  all 
the  men  are  out  of  the  respective  heading  or  branch  entry. 

158.  There  shall  be  in  the  circuit  at  the  foot  of  the  shaft  or 
slope,  two  plugs  with  flexible  leads  not  less  than  5 ft.  long,  to 
break  further  the  main  circuit  of  the  shot-firing  system  until 
all  the  men  in  the  mine  have  gone  out,  when  the  plugs  will  be 
put  in  by  the  one  man  authorized  to  do  so.  Provision  shall  be 
made  for  locking  the  plugs  out  of  circuit. 

159.  There  shall  be  placed  in  the  power-house  a locked 
switch  to  be  used  for  connecting  the  shot-firing  circuit  to  the 
generator  or  power-line.  This  switch  shall  be  thrown-in  only 
by  the  man  who  is  authorized  to  do  the  shot-firing,  and  not 
until  the  men  have  been  checked  out  of  the  mine. 

160.  There  shall  be  placed  in  the  shot-firer's  cabin  a locked 
firing-switch,  which  shall  be  thrown  only  by  the  authorized 
shot-firer  after  all  the  men  are  out  of  the  mine,  and  after  all 
other  switches  have  been  thrown-in.  In  firing  shots,  this 
switch  shall  be  thrown  but  once. 

161.  To  insure  that  all  men  are  out  of  the  mine,  an  approved 
system  of  checking  shall  be  employed. 


102  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

162.  All  shot-firing  lines  shall  be  carefully  insulated  and 
the  two  wires  that  form  the  circuit  shall  be  placed  on  the  side 
of  the  entry  or  passageway  opposite  from  that  on  which  the 
trolley-wire  is  placed,  and  so  far  as  possible  other  roads  than 
the  trolley  road  shall  be  used  for  carrying  the  wires  into  the 
working  places. 

Electric  Signaling  Equipment 

163.  The  parts  of  electric  signaling  systems  used  in  connec- 
tion with  mines  shall  be  designed,  constructed,  and  installed  in 
an  approved  manner.  No  voltage  in  excess  of  25  volts  shall  be 
applied  to  signal  circuits  in  places  where  gas  or  coal  dust  occur 
in  explosive  mixtures. 

164.  Only  permissible  equipment  shall  be  used  in  places 
where  gas  or  coal  dust  occurs  in  explosive  mixtures. 

165.  Suitable  precautions  shall  be  taken  to  prevent  electric 
signal  or  telephone  wires  from  becoming  grounded  or  from 
coming  in  contact  with  electric  conductors,  whether  insulated 
or  not.  Signal  circuits  and  telephone  wires  shall  not  be  in- 
stalled on  the  same  side  of  an  entry  as  power  conductors. 

BRIEF  OF  DISCUSSION  ON  JOINT  REPORT  OF  SUB-COM- 
MITTEES ON  STANDARDIZATION  OF  UNDERGROUND 
POWER  TRANSMISSION  AND  STANDARDIZATION 
OF  POWER  EQUIPMENT 

ta I 

Bj'  WARREN  R.  ROBERTS,  Chairman  of  General  Committee 

The  Chairman  of  these  two  Committees  decided  that  the 
subject  matter  each  of  them  had  under  consideration  was  so 
interwoven  that  it  was  best  to  consolidate  their  efforts,  and 
their  work  was  therefore  carried  on  in  joint  sessions,  and  they 
rendered  a joint  report. 

The  Committees  were  most  fortunate  in  having  Mr.  Kiser, 
chairman  of  one  of  the  Sub-Committees,  present  at  the  Stand- 
ardization Conference  to  present  their  joint  report.  He  stated 
that  the  report  was  entirely  too  long,  and  contained  too  much 
technical  data,  he  thought,  to  make  it  of  interest  to  the  Con- 
ference, and  therefore  discussed  the  most  salient  features  of 
the  joint  report. 

Mr.  Kiser  first  expressed,  on  behalf  of  the  Chairman  of  both 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  HAMMER-DRILLS 


103 


these  Committees  their  sincere  appreciation  of  the  keen  in- 
terest shown  in  the  work  by  the  members  of  these  Committees. 
He  also  placed  in  the  record  an  expression  of  the  Committees’ 
indebtedness  to  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines  for  providing  not 
only  a meeting  place,  but  a secretary  during  their  joint  meet- 
ings. Mr.  Kiser  explained  that  the  work  of  their  Committees, 
and  therefore  their  report,  was  separated  into  two  general 
divisions : first,  the  standardization  of  practice  in  the  installa- 
tion and  operation  of  equipment,  and  the  standardization  of 
equipment. 

As  the  Electric  Power  Club  has  for  its  object  the  standard- 
ization of  capacities,  voltages,  speeds,  and  essential  mechanical 
features  of  electric  motors,  generators,  transformers,  etc.,  and 
as  its  standards  are  the  accepted  standards  throughout  the 
country,  it  was  suggested  that  the  Committee  adopt  them  as 
their  standards  for  such  equipment.  It  was  also  suggested 
that  the  standardization  rules  of  the  A.  I.  E.  E.  be  adopted  as 
our  standards  of  technical  matters.  In  giving  attention  to  the 
standardization  of  practice,  the  Committee  considered  that  this 
work  was  very  thoroughly  covered  by  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Mines  Technical  Paper  No.  138r  entitled  'Suggested  Rules  for 
Installing  and  Using  Electrical  Equipment  in  Bituminous  Coal 
Mines.’  The  data  contained  in  this  Bulletin  was  therefore 
taken  as  the  basis  for  the  work  of  the  Committee.  Each  rule 
was  thoroughly  discussed  and  revised  when  it  seemed  advis- 
able to  do  so  for  the  purpose  of  clarifying  it,  or  making  it  con- 
form to  present  day  practice. 

Lastly,  the  Committee  advises  that  the  rules  as  they  appear 
in  the  report  of  this  Committee  are  prepared  especially  to 
cover  coal-mining  conditions,  but  they  are  applicable  to  metal 
mines,  by  omitting  certain  paragraphs  which  concern  the  ex- 
istence of  gas  or  coal  dust  in  explosive  mixtures. 

This  brief  digest  of  the  verbal  presentation  of  this  most 
valuable  report  is  intended  simply  to  give  an  insight  into  the 
methods  of  procedure  by  this  Joint  Committee,  and  to  indicate 
the  careful  and  thorough  manner  in  which  they  have  done 
their  work.  A study  of  this  joint  report,  however,  is  necessary 
to  appreciate  the  amount  of  good  work  performed  on  behalf 
of  the  industry  by  this  Joint  Committee. 


104 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


DIGEST  OF  PAPER  ON 

SUGGESTIONS  FOR  THE  STANDARDIZATION  OF  HAMMER 
DRILLS  AND  ACCESSORIES 

Prepared  by  GEORGE  H.  GILMAN,  East  Boston,  Mass.  Member  of  the 
Sub-Committee  on  Drilling-Machines  and  Drilling 

Presented  at  the  Meeting  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  Drilling-Machines 

I do  not  recommend  an  attempt  being  made  to  restrict  the 
quantity  of  sizes  and  types  of  standard  machines  to  a point 
that  will  tend  to  lower  the  overall  efficiency  of  the  drilling 
operation,  regardless  of  the  fact  that  from  the  manufacturer’s 
viewpoint  the  fewer  the  number  and  types  of  machines  the 
greater  will  be  the  volume  of  each  type  built,  with  a consequent 
reduction  in  manufacturing  costs.  However,  with  a variety  of 
types  and  sizes  of  machines  to  choose  from,  the  individual 
mine  operator  will  be  able  to  select  the  minimum  number  to 
meet  to  the  best  advantage  the  requirements  of  the  work,  and 
after  the  selection  is  made,  it  will  then  be  necessary  for  the 
manufacturer’s  engineer  to  regulate  the  mechanism  of  the  drill 
in  order  that  it  may  be  adapted  to  the  conditions  of  ground 
and  air  pressure  to  the  best  advantage.  With  this  in  view,  I 
recommend  the  standardization  of  the  following  machines : 

Details,  Capacity  and  Use  of  Machines 

(1)  A hand-held  hammer-drill  to  weigh  25  to  30  lb.,  having 
automatic  bit  rotation,  double-grip  handle,  drill-steel 
retainer,  automatic  lubricator,  means  for  cleaning  the 
drill-hole  with  air  only,  and  a chuck  adapted  for  %-in. 
quarter-octagon  hollow  drill-steel,  having  %-in.  quar- 
ter-octagon collared  shank  % in.  long. 

Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  4 ft.  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — scaling  walls  and  hitch  cutting  from  ladder  or 
staging,  light  pop-holing,  etc. 

(2)  A hand-held  hammer-drill  to  weigh  30  to  40  lb.,  having 
automatic  bit  rotation,  double-grip  handle,  drill-steel 
retainer,  automatic  lubrication,  water  attachment,  and 
chuck  adapted  for  %-in.  quarter-octagon  hollow  drill- 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  HAMMER-DRILLS 


105 


steel  having  a %-in.  quarter-octagon  collared  shank 
314  in.  long. 

Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  8 in.  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — pop-holing  in  boulders,  blast-holes  in  shrinkage 
stopes,  quarry  work,  etc. 

A hand-held  hammer-drill  to  weigh  30  to  40  lb.,  having 
automatic  bit  rotation,  double-grip  handle,  drill-steel 
retainer,  automatic  lubrication,  and  chuck  adapted  for 
collared  solid  auger  drill-steel  of  cruciform  section 
1%-in.  diameter  (spiral  to  be  3*4  turns  per  foot), 
having  a %-in.  quarter-octagon  collared  shank  3 14  in. 
long. 

Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  9 ft.,  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — blast-hole  drilling  in  hematite  iron  ore,  hard 
pan,  gravel,  and  earth  formations. 

A hand-held  hammer-drill  to  weigh  55  to  60  lb.,  having 
automatic  bit  rotation,  double-grip  handle,  drill-steel 
retainer,  automatic  lubrication,  water  attachment,  and 
chuck  adapted  for  %-in.  quarter-octagon  hollow  drill- 
steel  having  a quarter-octagon  collared  shank  3%  in. 
long. 

Capacity — holes  to  maximum  depth  of  12  ft.  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — blast-hole  drilling  in  shafts,  open-pit  mining  and 
deep-hole  drilling  in  quarries. 

A mounted  hammer-drill  to  weigh  115  to  125  lb., 
having  a shell  and  feed-screw  equipped  with  a sliding 
trunnion  and  adapted  for  a normal  drill-steel  change 
of  24  in.  The  hammer  engine  to  have  automatic  drill- 
bit  rotation,  drill-steel  retainer,  automatic  lubrication, 
water  attachment,  and  chuck  adapted  for  %-in.  quar- 
ter-octagon hollow  drill-steel  having  a quarter-octagon 
collared  shank  3%  in.  long. 

Capacity — holes  to  be  a maximum  depth  of  12  ft.  with 
a bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — breast  stoping,  light  drifting,  and  tripod  drilling. 
A mounted  hammer-drill  to  weigh  160  to  180  lb., 
having  a shell  and  feed-screw  adapted  for  a normal 


106  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

steel  change  of  24  in.  The  hammer  engine  to  have 
automatic  drill-bit  rotation,  automatic  lubrication, 
water  attachment,  and  chuck  with  bayonet  lock 
adapted  for  1%-in.  round,  lugged  hollow  drill-steel 
having  a round  shank  3 13-16  in.  long. 

P Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  20  ft.,  with  a 

bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 
iU  Use — heavy  drifting  and  tripod  work. 

(7)  A pneumatic  feed  hammer-drill  to  weigh  80  to  90  lb., 
having  a pneumatic-feed  extension  to  the  hammer  en- 
gine adapted  for  a normal  steel  change  of  18  in.  The 
hammer  engine  to  have  automatic  drill-bit  rotation, 
automatic  lubrication,  water  attachment,  and  chuck 
adapted  for  %-in.  quarter-octagon  hollow  drill-steel, 
equipped  with  a quarter-octagon  collared  shank  3*4  in. 
long. 

Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  12  ft.  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — overhead  drilling  in  stopes  and  raises. 

(8)  A pneumatic  feed  hammer-drill  to  weigh  60  to  65  lb., 
having  a pneumatic-feed  extension  to  the  hammer  en- 
gine adapted  for  a normal  steel  change  of  18  in.  and 
adapted  to  be  oscillated  by  hand.  The  hammer  engine 
to  have  automatic  lubrication,  water  attachment,  and 
chuck  adapted  for  %-in  quarter-octagon  hollow  drill- 
steel,  equipped  with  a quarter-octagon  collared  shank 
3%  in.  long. 

Capacity — holes  to  a maximum  depth  of  8 ft.  with  a 
bottom  diameter  of  1%  inches. 

Use — overhead  drilling  in  stopes  and  raises  where  the 
conditions  of  the  work  do  not  demand  that  the  drill  be 
equipped  for  automatic  rotation  of  the  drill-steel. 

Size  of  Drill-Steel 

In  making  recommendations  for  machine  standardization 
the  standardization  of  drill-steel  should  be  embodied,  for  to  my 
knowledge  there  is  no  good  reason  why  for  98%  of  the  under- 
ground conditions  encountered  in  metal  mining  there  should 
be  more  than  three  sizes  and  shapes  employed. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  HAMMER-DRILLS 


107 


(a)  %-in.  quarter-octagon  hollow  drill-steel  equipped  with 
a %- in.  collared  quarter-octagon  shank  3%  in.  long. 

Applicable  to  machines  1,  2,  4,  5,  7,  and  8. 

(b)  l^-in.  solid  cruciform  twisted  drill-steel  equipped 
with  a %-in.  collared  quarter-octagon  shank  3%  in. 
long. 

Applicable  to  machine  3. 

(c)  1 14-in.  round,  hollow  drill-steel  equipped  with  a 1%-in. 
round,  lugged  shank  3 13-16  in.  long. 

Applicable  to  machine  6. 

The  %-in.  hollow  quarter-octagon  section  is  recommended 
under  (a)  because  of  its  angular  shape,  which,  when  rotated 
in  the  drill-hole,  facilitates  the  ejection  of  the  sludge  and  pre- 
vents mud  collars  from  forming.  In  cross-sectional  area  it 
exceeds  that  of  the  hexagon,  round,  and  cruciform  shapes  of 
corresponding  diameter,  thus  providing  greater  strength  in 
comparison,  and  when  the  shanks  are  made  in  this  section, 
greater  bearing  surface  to  resist  wear  both  in  the  shank  and 
chuck  bushing.  The  shape  of  the  quarter-octagon  steel  also 
facilitates  the  forging  of  a four-winged  bit  as  the  wings  may 
be  drawn  from  the  four  flattened  corners  of  the  bar,  and  in 
addition  it  provides  an  ideal  gripping  surface  for  the  dies  of 
the  drill-sharpening  machine. 

Heretofore  it  has  been  an  accepted  theory  that  in  the  case 
of  pneumatic-feed  drills,  a collarless  drill-shank  is  desirable, 
for  by  its  use  the  work  of  putting  the  collar  on  the  steel  is 
obviated.  This  assumed  advantage  is,  however,  subject  to 
question  when  it  is  considered  that  the  employment  of  shank- 
less drill-steel  necessitates  the  use  of  an  anvil-block  or  striking- 
pin  interposed  between  the  hammer-piston  and  the  drill-steel, 
which  depending  upon  its  weight  and  the  character  of  the  blow 
delivered  by  the  pneumatic  hammer,  results  in  a loss  of  from 
20  to  30%  of  the  effectiveness  of  the  blow  in  transmission 
through  the  part.  That  it  precludes  the  possibility  of  standard- 
izing on  two  sizes  or  types  of  drill-steel  for  the  average  hard- 
rock  metal  mine  and,  furthermore,  that  it  precludes  the  em- 
ployment of  a drill-steel  retained  as  an  integral  part  of  the 
machine  for  extracting  the  drill-steel  from  the  drill-hole.  The 
desirability  of  a collar  or  lugs  at  the  base  of  the  shank  of  drill- 


108  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

steel  that  is  adapted  for  drifting,  sinking,  pop-holing,  drilling, 
etc.,  needs  no  comment;  therefore,  as  a suggestion  in  view  of 
simplifying  the  steel  equipment  of  the  mine  and  its  standard- 
ization that  the  same  %-im  quarter-octagon,  collared  drill-steel 
recommended  for  other  machines  employed  for  sinking,  light 
drifting,  breast  stoping,  and  pop-hole  drilling  be  employed  for 
all  pneumatic  feed  stoping-drills. 

After  the  type  and  size  of  drill-steel  bar  and  its  shank  is 
settled  upon,  careful  consideration  should  be  given  to  the 
change  length  and  also  to  the  gauge  of  the  bit  for  the  different 
steels  that  comprise  a set  to  drill  to  a stated  depth,  it  is  rec- 
ommended that  a normal  change  length  of  12  in.  be  adopted 
for  the  %-im  collared  quarter-octagon  steel  as  applied  to 
machines  1,  2,  4,  5,  7,  and  8,  an  18-in.  change  length  for  the 
l^-in.  cruciform,  twisted  solid  steel  as  applied  to  machine  3, 
and  a 24-in.  change  length  for  the  1 14-in.  round,  hollow  lugged 
steel  as  applied  to  machine  6. 

Importance  of  the  Drill-Bit 

Very  often  one  of  the  biggest  ‘leaks’  in  a mine  is  to  be  found 
in  the  cutting  end  of  the  drill-bit  and  as  this  is  the  ‘business’ 
end  of  metal  mining  it  is  the  logical  starting  point  in  the  cam- 
paign to  raise  efficiency.  The  start  should,  therefore,  be  made, 
first,  by  selecting  drill-steel  of  the  required  shape  and  quality 
for  the  work;  secondly,  by  forging  the  bit  end  of  the  drill-steel 
to  the  required  shape;  and  thirdly,  by  subjecting  it  to  proper 
heat-treatment. 

Heretofore,  many  mine  operators  have  adopted  the  practice 
of  hiring  a blacksmith  or  drill-sharpener,  bestowing  upon  him 
the  responsibility  of  keeping  the  mine  supplied  with  drill-steel 
and  have  trusted  to  the  ‘four-leaf  clover’  that  they  carry 
around  in  their  notebooks,  for  results.  Under  such  conditions 
they  usually  get  them,  but  they  are  not  as  a rule  of  a kind  that 
justify  the  signification  of  the  ‘four-leaf  clover.’ 

The  material  from  which  the  drill-steel  is  made  should  be 
selected  to  meet  the  existing  conditions  of  the  work,  after 
which  the  selection  should  be  rigidly  adhered  to,  and  a stand- 
ard method  of  procedure  adopted  for  working  it.  Metallurgy 
has  made  such  rapid  strides  that  it  is  now  a comparatively 
simple  matter  to  secure  the  chemical  composition  and  physical 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  HAMMER-DRILLS 


109 


characteristics  of  any  particular  kind  of  steel  which,  after 
being  determined,  should  be  used  as  the  basis  of  a standard  set 
of  specifications.  There  is  nothing  more  disconcerting  to  the 
drill-steel  smith  than  to  be  forced  to  work  steel  of  varying 
chemical  composition  that  invariably  is  found  about  at  the 
mine  where  material  is  purchased  from  several  sources,  with 
no  more  rigid  specifications  than  the  mere  statement  that  hol- 
low or  solid  drill-steel  is  what  is  wanted. 

Sharpening  Drills  at  Correct  Heat 

After  the  material  is  standardized  for  the  work,  smiths 
should  be  taught  to  forge  the  material  at  a safe  working  heat. 
All  blacksmiths  know  that  the  hotter  steel  is  heated  prepara- 
tory to  forging  the  earlier  will  be  the  work  of  hammering  it 
into  shape ; while  but  few  realize  the  disastrous  effect  of  over- 
heating, which  is  detected  only  when  the  finished  drill-bit  is 
subjected  to  service  perhaps  in  an  inaccessible  working  place 
a mile  or  two  underground  and  away  from  the  shop.  Then  it 
is  usually  the  steel  that  is  condemned  instead  of  the  real  cause 
of  trouble  being  determined  and  checked. 

The  next  important  lesson  that  the  blacksmith  should  be 
taught  is  the  fact  that  in  the  operation  of  tempering  or  heat- 
treating,  all  straight  carbon  drill-steel  should  be  quenched 
when  heated  to  the  critical  point  regardless  of  the  method 
employed  for  drawing  the  temper.  It  is  called  the  critical 
point,  because  it  is  the  point  in  the  temperature  of  the  piece 
being  heated  at  which  a change  takes  place  in  the  structure  of 
the  steel  due  to  the  carbon  being  dissolved.  It  is  the  point  be- 
low which  steel  will  not  harden  when  quenched,  and  by  coin- 
cidence it  is  the  point  at  which  the  steel  loses  its  magnetism. 

When  high,  straight  carbon-steel  is  heated  to  the  critical 
point,  and  cooled  rapidly  by  quenching  in  ice-cold  water,  maxi- 
mum hardness  and  density  is  obtained ; and  it  must  be  remem- 
bered that  density  of  structure  is  equally  as  important  a 
factor  as  hardness  in  rendering  the  tool  both  shock  and  wear- 
resisting.  The  required  degree  of  toughness  is  secured  by 
varying  the  rate  of  cooling,  when  the  piece  is  quenched  at  the 
critical  temperature,  and  as  applied  to  the  cutting  point  of  the 
tool,  this  must  be  varied  to  suit  the  requirements  of  the  work. 

For  the  shank  or  striking-end  of  the  tool,  density  and  tough- 
ness are  more  to  be  desired  than  hardness,  so  for  general  work 


110  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

the  desired  result  may  be  secured  by  heating  to  the  critical 
temperature  the  entire  shank-end  for  a short  distance  below 
the  collar  or  shoulder,  dipping  the  tip-end  in  cyanide  of  potas- 
sium and  then  quenching  in  oil,  allowing  it  to  remain  there 
until  cool. 

Effect  of  Over-Heating  Steel 

Let  us  consider  the  resultant  effect  of  operating  on  a drill- 
steel  that  has  been  injured  in  the  smith's  shop.  Regardless  of 
whether  it  has  been  over-heated  preparatory  to  forging,  over- 
heated preparatory  to  quenching,  or  quenched  at  too  low  a 
heat,  the  general  result  is  the  same.  The  cutting  end  of  the 
tool  is  rapidly  dulled  in  service,  due  to  the  absence  of  wear- 
resisting  qualities.  It  loses  its  ability  to  penetrate  the  rock 
when  struck,  so  that  the  shock  must  of  necessity  be  absorbed 
in  the  steel  itself,  or  transmitted  back  to  the  actuating  engine. 
The  effect  of  continued  hammering  with  a dulled  cutting  tool 
upon  the  rock  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  operating  against 
an  impenetrable  substance  such  as  a hardened  anvil.  Minute 
fatigue-checks  are  established  throughout  the  length  of  the 
drill,  and  as  the  strength  of  a chain  is  determined  by  its  weak- 
est link,  the  ability  of  a piece  of  steel  to  withstand  vibratory 
shock  is  determined  by  its  weakest  point.  It  is  at  this  point 
that  one  at  least  of  the  fatigue-checks  will  have  been  estab- 
lished. Initially,  it  may  be  so  small  as  to  be  hardly  detectable 
by  the  naked  eye,  but  with  continued  operation  it  gradually 
grows  larger  by  assuming  a semi-circular  or  arc-shaped  ap- 
pearance, extending  into  the  body  of  the  material.  As  this 
check  enlarges  it  is  caused  to  open  and  shut  as  the  vibratory 
stresses  to  which  the  cutting  tool  is  subjected  affect  it.  Even- 
tually,* the  steel  or  cutting  tool  is  broken  apart  with  the  balance 
of  the  section,  disclosing  a good,  clear  fracture  of  the  metal  in 
its  original  condition. 

Unfortunately  the  effect  of  the  abuse  to  which  the  drill-steel 
or  cutting  tool  is  subjected,  does  not  as  a rule  end  with  the 
initial  fracture  of  the  bar.  When  a drill-steel  breaks  apart  in 
service,  the  shorter  end  only  is  as  a rule  discarded  and  the 
longer  is  set  aside  to  be  either  re-shanked  or  re-sharpened  at 
the  convenience  of  the  drill-steel  smith.  A defective  piece  of 
steel  is  thus  again  put  in  commission,  and  often  is  broken  again 
in  service  before  it  is  subjected  to  undue  shock. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  111 


The  effect  of  operating  on  a dulled  drill-bit  is  not  confined  to 
the  cutting  tool,  for  it  must  be  remembered  that  the  cushioning 
effect  due  to  the  penetration  of  the  chisel  in  the  material 
worked  upon,  alone  makes  possible  the  successful  operation  of 
every  part  comprised  in  the  make-up  of  the  rock-drilling 
engine. 

Standardization  of  Hose  and  Hose  Fittings 

It  is  recommended  that  the  inside  diameter,  outside  diameter, 
length,  and  type  of  hose  employed  for  supplying  the  rock-drill 
with  air  and  water  under  pressure  should  be  standardized,  and 
the  following  suggestions  are  advanced  with  this  in  view. 

For  the  air  supply  of  machines  1,  2,  3,  4,  5,  7,  and  8, 
%-in.  plain  pneumatic  hose,  without  wire  winding. 

For  the  air  supply  of  machine  6,  a 1-in.  plain  pneumatic 
air  hose  without  wire  winding. 

The  length  of  all  air-supply  hose  to  be  50  feet. 

For  the  water  supply  of  all  machines  1/2-in.  half  round 
wire-wound  hose. 

The  length  of  water  hose  to  be  25  feet. 

My  suggestions  relative  to  the  standardization  of  hose  fit- 
tings for  hammer  rock-drill  service  were  embodied  in  an 
article  that  was  published  in  the  Engineering  and  Mining 
Journal  of  June  5,  1920. 

Standardization  of  Mining  Columns  for  Hammer  Rock-Drills 

Of  the  hammer  rock-drills  recommended,  two  only  require 
mountings,  namely,  5 and  6.  In  order  to  keep  the  saddle 
of  the  mining  columns  limited  to  two  sizes,  and  incidentally 
provide  the  required  strength  of  column  for  the  varying  condi- 
tions of  use,  the  following  is  recommended : 

For  machine  5,  a 2%-in.  single-screw  column  with 
21/2-im  arm  when  single  drill  is  employed,  and  3-in.  double- 
screw column  with  2%-in.  arms  when  two  drills  are  used 
on  the  same  column. 

For  machine  6,  single-screw  column  with  3V^-in.  arm 
when  single  drill  is  employed,  and  4-in.  double-screw 
column  with  3V2-im  arms  when  two  drills  are  used  on  the 
same  column. 


112 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


PRELIMINARY  INVESTIGATION  ON  THE  STANDARDIZA- 
TION OF  DRILLING-MACHINES  AND  DRILL-STEEL 


Prepared  Under  the  Direction  of  ARTHUR  NOTMAN,  Superintendent, 
Mine  Department,  Copper  Queen  Branch,  Phelps  Dodge  Corpo- 
ration, Bisbee,  Ariz.  (Member  of  the  Sub-Committee  on 
Drilling-Machines  and  Drill-Steel).* 

Standardization  of  Rock-Drill  Fittings 

interchangeable  between  many  of  the  machines  of  the  manu- 
facturer, but  also  to  have  the  rock-drill  companies  adopt  the 
same  specifications  in  making  these  minor  parts.  At  the 
present  time  this  condition  is  far  from  realization. 

For  example:  in  the  case  of  water  and  air  spuds,  the  only 
course  for  a large  mining  company  to  pursue  today  is  to  accept 
the  product  of  one  manufacturer  as  the  standard.  This  means 
scrapping  the  spuds  on  many  of  the  newly-purchased  ma- 
chines. Though  such  a standard  has  been  adopted  at  the  Cop- 
per Queen  Branch  of  the  Phelps  Dodge  Corporation,  it  re- 
quires three  sizes  of  water  spuds  to  fit  out  the  three  types  of 
Ingersoll-Rand  machines  in  use.  They  must  be  machined 
down  or  bushed  up  to  fit  other  makes.  A change  in  this  condi- 
tion would  greatly  benefit  mining  companies,  and  it  would 
work  no  hardship  upon  rock-drill  manufacturers. 

The  following  discussion  is  based  upon  the  principle  that 
differences  in  the  sizes  of  bolts,  nuts,  and  spuds  should  be 
reduced  to  a minimum.  It  is  important  that  as  few  wrenches 
as  possible  be  needed  to  operate  the  machine.  The  more 
wrenches  required,  the  greater  will  be  the  chance  of  losing 
them  underground,  as  well  as  loss  of  time  on  the  part  of  the 
miner  in  operating  the  machine.  It  must  be  realized  that  in 
drifting,  only  about  30%  of  what  is  charged  as  drilling  time 
is  actually  spent  with  the  bit  hitting  the  face.  Through 
standardization,  the  operating  efficiency  should  be  slightly 

*This  report,  according  to  Mr.  Mitke,  must  in  no  way  be  considered 
as  the  report  of  the  Sub-Committee  on  drilling  machines  and  drill-steel, 
but  are  merely  the  individual  views  of  two  members  of  the  Committee, 
and  as  such  contain  much  valuable  data.  Mr.  Braly,  Chairman  of  the 
Committee,  reported  that  while  considerable  work  had  already  been  accom- 
plished, the  Committee,  as  a whole,  was  not  yet  ready  to  submit  a report. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  113 


increased.  An  additional  advantage  would  be  the  reduction  in 
the  number  of  repair  parts  to  be  carried. 

The  chuck-wrench  is  the  chief  tool  used  in  operating  drift- 
ing machines.  As  many  nuts  should  fit  this  wrench  as  is  prac- 
tical. The  monkey-wrench  should  be  eliminated,  because  it 
is  expensive  and  unsatisfactory.  It  must  be  admitted  that 
it  is  a very  handy  tool,  but  underground  conditions  cause  rust 
to  ruin  the  threads  long  before  actual  hard  usage  would  neces- 
sitate scrapping.  Stillson  wrenches  are  too  valuable  for  other 
purposes  to  remain  long  on  the  job,  unless  owned  by  the  oper- 
ator, and  are  also  subject  to  damage  from  corrosive  water. 

While  many  of  the  following  suggestions  may  seem  radical, 
they  are  offered  in  the  hope  that  they  will  help  to  bring  about 
a much-needed  standardization. 

Suggested  Improvements  in  Machine-Drills 

(1)  Larger  oil  reservoirs,  if  practical,  would  reduce  trou- 
bles due  to  lack  of  lubrication  by  lessening  the  responsibility 
of  the  operator  in  this  regard.  At  present,  the  tendency  of 
rock-drill  manufacturers  seems  to  be  to  make  the  lubricators 
too  small. 

(2)  Some  of  the  latest  type  rock-drills  call  for  both  grease 
and  oil.  Requiring  two  kinds  of  lubricant  is  a disadvantage, 
as  it  adds  one  more  duty  to  the  miner.  In  the  past,  the  drill- 
runner  has  not  proved  himself  able  to  handle  even  one  oil-can, 
to  say  nothing  of  two. 

(3)  With  the  introduction  of  wet  machines,  the  tendency 
has  been  to  develop  drifting  rounds  with  an  increased  num- 
ber of  upper  holes.  In  the  Copper  Queen  mines,  practically 
all  of  the  drifting  is  done  with  the  standard  V-cut  round,  using 
either  16  or  13  holes.  About  85%  of  the  drifts  require  16 
holes  to  break  the  ground.  The  16  and  13-hole  rounds  have 
9 and  7 holes,  respectively,  drilled  from  under  the  arm.  This 
means  that  plugs  in  the  lubricators  should  be  so  placed  as  to 
allow  filling  when  the  machine  is  in  either  the  over  or  the 
under-arm  position.  It  is  acknowledged  that  doubling  the 
number  of  plugs  doubles  the  chances  of  their  working  loose 
and  getting  lost.  To  place  the  extra  oil-plugs  properly  will 
require  a slight  extension  of  the  lubricator  castings. 


114  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

(I  wish  to  make  no  apology  for  any  attempt  to  show  drill 
manufacturers  how  to  change  their  design,  or  to  do  any  of 
these  things,  because  I do  not  pretend  to  know.  This  is  merely 
offered  as  a suggestion  and  without  any  right  of  opinion  in 
the  matter.) 

Lubrication 

The  under  oil-plugs  should  be  on  the  opposite  side  of  the 
rock-drill  from  the  hose  connections.  In  any  event,  some 
means  should  be  devised  for  lubricating  the  machine  in  this 
position. 

Under  present  conditions,  what  little  oil  a drifter  gets  when 
it  is  under  the  arms,  comes  through  the  hose,  as  few  men  will 
take  the  time  or  trouble  to  lossen  the  clamps  and  ‘dump  over’ 
their  machine  to  permit  filling  the  lubricators.  Even  to  oil 
through  the  hose  means  two  trips  to  the  air  head,  which  gener- 
ally results  in  the  machines  running  dry  most  of  the  time. 
The  under-arm  position  comes  in  the  last  half  of  the  shift, 
when  time  is  inclined  to  be  short,  and  lubrication  is  forgotten 
as  long  as  the  piston  moves.  It  is  unnecessary  to  more  than 
mention  the  fact  that  sufficient  lubrication  is  very  necessary 
with  the  modern  high-speed  machines. 

To  comply  with  the  safety  regulations,  the  stoper  handles 
should  point  down;  the  end  of  the  handle  can  be  enlarged  to 
form  a rest  for  the  driller’s  hand.  If  the  handle  must  extend 
upward,  it  should  be  bent  to  extend  over  the  arm.  In  this 
case,  the  handle  length  must  be  somewhat  greater  than  the 
average  width  of  a man’s  hand. 

The  position  of  the  stoper  handle  leads  up  to  the  location 
of  the  oil-plugs.  At  present,  the  usual  place  for  the  plugs  is 
at  the  end  of  either  the  arm  or  handle.  All  oil-plugs  should 
be  placed  in  such  a position  as  to  allow  filling  of  the  lubrica- 
tors when  the  stoper  is  in  the  running  position.  This  would 
ensure  more  frequent  oiling.  The  necessity  of  having  to  lay 
the  stoper  on  its  side,  or  turn  it  upside  down,  to  fill  the  oil-cups, 
does  not  work  toward  sufficient  machine  lubrication. 

With  some  of  the  new  mechanically  rotated  stopers,  the  for- 
ward oiling  or  greasing  point  is  in  no  sense  an  oil  reservoir. 
The  opening  is  really  nothing  but  a hole  into  the  machine,  and 
it  is  valueless  as  regards  lubrication. 


STANDARDIZATION  OP  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  113 


Position  of  Fittings 

(4)  Some  of  the  self-rotating  stopers  exhaust  at  right 
angles  to  the  machines.  Not  confining  the  exhaust  to  a breech- 
ing reduces  the  back  pressure  and  the  tendency  to  freeze. 

The  direct  exhaust  certainly  is  a mechanical  advantage, 
but  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  a handicap  to  the  drill-runner,  who 
must  keep  his  light  from  being  blown  out.  From  the  miner's 
point  of  view,  the  exhaust  along  the  feed  cylinder  is  the  most 
satisfactory.  However,  side  exhaust  on  a self-rotator  is  not 
as  objectionable  as  it  should  be  on  a ‘wiggletail.’ 

(5)  It  is  possible  that  it  might  be  more  satisfactory  to  dis- 
regard the  oil  reservoirs  on  the  plugger-drills  and  go  back  to 
the  lubricating  throttle-valves.  This  will  depend  on  the  capac- 
ity of  the  machine  oil-cups  and  the  cost  of  the  valves. 

(6)  On  the  drifters,  the  air  and  water  connections  should 
be  on  the  same  side  of  the  back  head,  and  yet  not  interfere 
with  removing  the  side-rod.  Probably  it  is  better  to  have 
the  connections  on  the  right  (exhaust)  side  of  the  machine. 

If  one  connection  is  made  through  the  rear  of  the  back 
head,  the  hose  gets  in  the  way  of  the  crank-handle  when  chang- 
ing steel.  If  the  hose  connections  are  on  opposite  sides,  they 
interfere  with  moving  close  to  the  column  to  drill  the  center- 
line  holes. 

The  question  of  which  side  both  the  spuds  should  be  on  is 
somewhat  a matter  of  choice,  depending  upon  the  shape  of  the 
back  of  the  drift,  and  whether  the  operator  is  right  or  left- 
handed.  This  is  the  case  since  the  side  next  to  the  column, 
when  the  machine  is  over  the  arm,  is  the  far  side  when  the 
machine  is  under  the  arm.  When  possible,  it  is  better  to  col- 
lar the  top  center-line  holes  on  center  and  swing  the  lower 
ones  to  bring  their  bottoms  on  line. 

Design  of  Chuck-Wrenches 

(7)  It  is  essential  to  have  a chuck-wrench  that  fits  all  of 
the  frequently  used  nuts  and  fittings  about  the  drill  which  are 
used  in  rotative  operations.  Those  parts  are  the  nuts  on  the 
arm,  collar,  clamp,  and  swing  bolts.  It  is  also  important  that 
the  small  end  of  the  chuck- wrench  should  fit  the  water  con- 
nection nut,  oil-plugs,  and  the  back-head  cap.  This  wrench 


11G  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

should  be  double-ended  and  of  proper  design.  The  weight  of 
the  wrench  should  be  between  5*/2  and  7 lbs.,  and  it  should  be 
strong  enough  to  withstand  being  used  as  a hammer.  Pound- 
ing of  the  machine  should  not  be  tolerated,  but  the  compromise 
of  occasionally  hitting  the  drill-steel  seems  to  be  a necessary 
evil.  A chuck-wrench  with  jaw  openings  of  1 w/w  and  l5/i6  in. 
has  proved  satisfactory  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines. 

If  the  chuck-wrench  had  attached  to  it  a short  chain  with 
a thin  ring  over  the  swing  or  arm-bolts,  it  would  help  increase 
efficiency  when  drilling  over  the  arm.  The  chain  must  be 
attached  to  the  wrench  by  a sliding  link ; the  ring  to  hang  on 
the  bolts  should  be  2 inches  in  diameter. 

(8)  To  move  the  smaller  nuts  about  the  drifters,  at  least 
one  other  two-ended  wrench  will  be  required.  These  two 
will  be  all  that  are  needed,  if  the  ^-in.  valve-chest  and  side- 
rod  bolts  can  be  eliminated  from  a few  types  of  machines. 
It  may  be  that  the  miner  will  have  but  little  need  of  the  smaller 
wrench,  except  occasionally  to  tighten  the  side-rods  of  certain 
types  of  drills.  If  it  were  possible  to  handle  the  side-rods  with 
the  chuck-wrench  it  would  be  a big  advantage.  Perhaps  this 
can  be  done  by  locking  the  side-rod  nut  instead  of  the  bolt,  and 
enlarging  the  bolt-head  to  fit  the  small  end  of  the  wrench. 
With  some  machines,  the  bolt-head  is  in  too  tight  a place  to 
permit  turning  with  chuck-wrench.  Even  then  nothing 
would  prevent  the  use  of  the  enlarged  bolt-head,  though  the 
small  wrench  would  have  to  be  used  on  the  nuts. 

It  may  be  possible  to  combine  the  box-wrench  with  either  of 
the  two  double  wrenches,  by  placing  it  between  the  jaws  to  be 
used  in  withdrawing  the  steel  from  the  hole. 

Bolts  and  Threads 

In  the  suggestions  that  follow,  all  bolts  referred  to  should 
have  U.  S.  Standard  bolt  threads.  For  various  bolt  dimen- 
sions, the  table  given  below  lists  the  thread  per  inch  and  the 
width  in  inches,  across  the  flats  of  hexagon  and  square  nuts, 
according  to  U.  S.  Standards. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  117 


Width  across 
flats  of  hexagon 

Width  across  flats 

Diameter  of 

Threads 

and  square  nuts. 

of  hexagon  nuts, 
inches— finished 

bolt— inches 

per  inch 

inchesr—rough 

iy8 

7 

l13/l6 

1% 

i 

8 

Vs 

9 

l7/l6 

1% 

% 

10 

1% 

lS/l6 

% 

11 

lVl6 

1 

% 

13 

Vs 

13/l6 

7/l6 

14 

2%2 

23/32 

% 

16 

% 

% 

5/l6 

18 

1%2 

1%2 

% 

20 

V2 

Vl6 

BRIGGS 

PIPE-THREADS 

Pipe  diameter—  Threads 


Pipe  diameter—  Threads 

inches  per  inch 

% 18 

1/2  and  % 14 

1 to  2 11  y2 


The  taper  of  threads  is  % inch  per  foot 

As  to  the  shape  of  nuts  used,  the  square  ones  are  more  dur- 
able and,  when  practical,  should  be  adopted  as  standard.  If 
necessary,  the  square  nut  can  always  be  replaced  by  the  hexa- 
gon, except  in  a few  cases,  such  as  on  the  arms,  clamp,  swing, 
and  a few  other  bolts. 

Water-Hose  Connection 

The  same  size  water-spud  should  fit  all  machines.  A stand- 
ard pipe-thread  should  be  on  the  machine  side  of  the  spud. 
The  connection  with  the  water-hose  should  be  made  with  par- 
allel threads  on  account  of  excessive  wear  due  to  frequent 
breaking  of  connection.  The  head  on  the  water-spuds  might 
be  round  to  prevent  unnecessary  tinkering  with  it  by  the 
machine-man. 

The  nut  to  fit  the  water-spud  should  be  of  hexagon  shape 
and  114  in.  across  flats.  It  is  very  important  that  this  nut 
should  fit  the  small  end  of  the  chuck-wrench. 

In  practice,  the  water-spuds  seem  to  wear  out  long  before 
the  nuts.  The  nut  should  be  made  of  the  softer  material  as  it 
should  be  the  first  to  need  replacing.  The  spud,  while  easier 
to  change,  is  the  more  expensive. 

Table  No.  1 gives  some  data  on  the  water-spuds  and  nuts 
that  are  now  on  hand. 


118 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


o f! 


a>  fl 

a a 


5C  fl 
fl  O 
ed  fl 


«o  co  ® 
aF?  e^N 


« CQ 


H e. 


& m A a 

ii  h«  o 
1 1! - 
agi  s 

o ^ a 

H 


CO  CO 


K> 

5* 


£ I 

Ph  -2 


+ 


a -S 

cq  a 


T— I rH  1— I 

'fl 

fl  . . 

fl  X X 

o a>  a> 

ffi  W 


V^jJ  -v^j 


X X 
<D  o> 

ffi  E 


ft 

CD  g . £h 

bJO  3 2 

bo  a £ 

3 O r*> 

fl  i)  0) 
Oi  M ^ 


ft 

a>  u 
to)  ® 
to)  p, 
fl  o 

£ $2 


Stop«r 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  119 


Each  of  the  six  spuds  listed  above  are  different  in  detail. 
As  stated  before,  it  takes  three  sizes  of  I.-R.  water-spuds  to  rig 
out  the  various  types  of  I.-R.  machines  alone  in  use  in  the  Cop- 
per Queen  mines.  Only  the  Sullivan  water-spud  nut  fits  the 
chuck-wrench.  For  convenience,  the  I.-R.  has  been  adopted  as 
standard,  but  must  be  machined  down  or  bushed  up  to  fit  other 
makes. 

Water-Needle  Connection 

It  is  often  a hard  job  to  remove  the  back-head  cap  with  a 
monkey-wrench.  The  cap  should  be  haxagon  shaped  and  l1/^ 
in.  across  flats.  This  size  cap  can  be  handled  by  the  small  end 
of  the  chuck-wrench.  The  same  size  back-head  cap  and  plug 
should  be  on  the  drifters,  pluggers,  and  even  the  stopers,  when 
the  needle  is  held  in  place  by  the  cap  and  plug  method.  The 
plugger  handle  standards  should  be  wide  enough  to  permit  the 
use  of  the  chuck-wrench  on  the  back-head  cap. 

The  head  of  the  back-head  plug  should  be  so  shaped  as  to  fit 
the  %-in.  bolt  end  of  the  small  nut-wrench. 

The  combined  back-head  plug  and  cap  is  an  improvement 
over  the  two  separate  fittings.  The  threads  on  the  back-head 
cap  and  plug  need  not  necessarily  be  standard  ones. 


120 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


w 33 
o 

eS  a 


® a u 
a n <u 

v 

ci 

a . 


® s 

QJ  33 

s g 

cS  £ 

S 


I 

® s 

o>  33 

1.2 


K a a!  2 
. a o 
m ■5c  rt  .3 

be 


1 


4> 

2 « 
0j  f_| 

5 5 


ii 

CD  W 


vOO  v«l 
fc5''  kO^ 


o !S' 


■5  Ph  (i|  im  in  pL(  o mo 


>> 

-ft 


v$0  v£1  V«3  vS 
kO^  l-i^  CO''  «K 

►>»  K*>  K*> 

^ ,2  ,D 


o 


S I m 

co  | a> 
g ® 33 
CJ  cS  3 

<j  <a  .5 


_u  CD 

^ is^l  S« 


-cj  O 

* 

a>  33  -r 
P<  3 

B£e2 

s — 


X £ 50 

||g 


550  D 114  % by  % 

13  Leyner  iy2  % by  % 

148  Leyner  Same  as  18  Leyner 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  121 


Of  the  above  listed  back-head  caps  those  on  the  Waugh 
Turbro,  DX  61,  550  D,  and  the  Jackhamer,  will  fit  the  small 
end  of  the  chuck- wrench.  The  B.  H.  plugs  on  the  550  D and 
the  Jackhamer  could  be  handled  with  the  %-in.  bolt-wrench. 
The  148  and  18  Leyner  back-head  plugs  are  the  same  and  those 
on  the  550  D and  Jackhamer  are  alike. 

No  doubt  these  important  parts  can  be  standardized.  Sim- 
ilarly, of  the  nine  water-needle  connections  examined,  those  on 
the  18  and  148  Leyners  are  the  same  and  those  on  the  550  D 
and  Jackhamer  drill. 

Oil-Plugs 

One  of  the  features  of  an  ideal  oil-plug  is  that  it  will  not 
shake  loose  with  the  vibration  of  the  machine.  The  diameter 
of  the  plugs  should  probably  be  about  % in.  Standard  bolt- 
threads  will  hardly  do  for  the  plugs.  Whether  the  threads 
should  be  tapered  or  parallel,  is  perhaps  a matter  not  fully  de- 
termined. The  coarse  threads  seem  to  have  gained  more  favor 
here  than  the  fine  ones.  If  the  oil-plugs  that  have  the  eight 
parallel  threads  per  inch  had  a split-lock  washer  hold  between 
the  threads  and  head  they  might  prove  efficient.  The  leather 
gaskets  cause  the  plugs  to  hold,  but  as  they  fit  tightly  when 
new  and  are  difficult  to  put  in  place,  it  is  impossible  to  get  the 
drill-runners  to  use  them.  A lubricator  plug  that  would  re- 
quire only  hand  tightening  would  be  a big  improvement. 

One  size  of  oil-plug  can  be  made  to  do  for  the  drifters, 
stopers  and  pluggers. 

The  lubricator  plugs  should  be  handled  by  the  small  end  of 
the  chuck-wrench. 

A hexagon-shaped  head  1 % in*  across  flats  would  fit  the 
chuck-wrench,  and  yet  take  no  more  room  than  the  plugs  now 
used  on  the  I.-R.  drifters.  The  present  form  of  head  with  the 
hole  affords  a means  of  strapping  the  plug  to  the  drill.  If  the 
hole  is  necessary,  both  the  hexagon  and  present  type  of  head 
can  be  combined. 


122  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Plug 

diameter- 

TABLE  No.  3 

OIL-PLUG  DATA 

Width 
of  head- 

Machine 

inches 

Threads  per  inch 

inches 

DX  61 

% 

18 — Taper 

Turbro 

% 

12 — Parallel 

18  Leyner 

Vs 

12 — Parallel 

Vs 

550  D 

Vs 

12 — Parallel 

% and  y2 

148  Leyner 

Vs 

12 — Parallel 

CC  II 

1 

14 — Parallel 

71 

% 

18 — Taper  (Special  Bushing) 

DP  33 

% 

18 — Taper 

NRW  93 

% 

18 — Taper 

BCRW  430 

% 

12 — Parallel 

Clipper 

% 

18 — Taper 

The  above  figures  show  that  there  are  listed  three  sizes  of 
Ingersoll-Rand  plugs.  The  Sullivan  and  Waugh  reservoir 
plugs  are  interchangeable. 

Hose  Clamp-Bolts 

The  sizes  of  the  bolts  and  nuts  now  furnished  with  the  hose 
clamps  are: 


Hose- 

DIXON 

Bolt- 

HOSE  CLAMPS 

Nut  across 

inches 

inches 

Nut 

fiats— inches 

1 

7/ie  by  2 

Square 

2%2  finished 

% 

% by  iy3 

Square 

% finished 

y2 

5/16  by  1% 

Square 

i%2  finished 

Hose — 

SULLIVAN  HOSE  CLAMPS 

Bolt— 

Nat  across 

inches 

inches 

Nut 

flats— inches  (hex.) 

1 

% by  2% 

Hexagon 

y/ie  rough 

% 

% by  1% 

Square 

iy6  rough 

y2 

% by  13,4 

Square 

rough 

With  the  Sullivan  clamps,  two  lengths  of  bolts  are  needed  for 
the  three  sizes  of  hose.  The  Dixon  make  calls  for  three  dif- 
ferent bolts  varying  in  both  diameter  and  length. 

The  hose-clamps  should  be  so  made  that  one  size  of  bolt  will 
do  for  the  three  hoses.  When  the  clamp  is  in  place  on  the  hose, 
the  end  of  the  bolts  should  not  project  more  than  %-inch  be- 
yond the  top  of  the  nut.  A bolt  that  is  a little  long  for  the 
smaller  clamps  could  be  easily  cut  off  after  being  put  in  place 
on  the  hose. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  123 


It  is  recommended  that  the  clamps  for  1,  %,  and 
hoses  be  designed  to  use  % by  2-in.  bolts  with  square  nuts.  If 
this  is  done,  the  hose-clamps,  crank,  and  throttle-bolts  will  be 
the  same. 

Drill-Column 

The  3%-in.  drill-column  seems  to  be  large  enough  for  any 
one-man  drill.  For  the  drifters,  the  double-jack  column  is 
preferred.  The  3-in.  mounting  would  do  for  the  mounted 
plugger-machines. 

The  details  of  the  connection  between  the  column-pipe  and 
cross-bar  should  be  standardized. 

The  3%-in.  double- jack  column  is  the  only  one  in  use  in  the 
Copper  Queen  mines. 

3 1/2 -Inch  Column 

The  jack-screws  and  nuts  should  be  of  some  accepted  de- 
sign and  size.  The  details  of  the  jack-screws  used  in  the  Cop- 
per Queen  mines  are  square  threads,  with  3 threads  per  inch, 
and  the  diameter  of  jack-screw  of  1%  inches. 

The  holes  in  the  screw-heads  should  be  not  less  than  1 inch 
in  diameter. 

The  cross-bar  must  be  long  enough  to  allow  the  arm  and 
safety-collar  to  pass  between  the  jack-screws  and  column-pipe. 

The  bolts  that  clamp  the  pipe  to  the  cross-bar  should  be  the 
same  size  as  the  safety  collar-bolts,  that  is,  % by  5 in.,  with 
the  regular  square-shaped  nut. 

S^-Inch  Arm 

The  arm-bolts  should  be  1 Vs  by  6%  in.,  with  square  nuts. 
The  bolts  now  used  on  the  arm  have  the  regular  square  head. 

35/2 -Inch  Clamp 

The  5-in.  cone  should  be  taken  as  standard.  The  bolts  now 
used  with  the  I-R  clamps  are: 

Clamp  1%  by  6%  in.  Square  head  Extra  long  sq.  nut 

Clamp  iys  by  6 in.  Bevel  head  Extra  long  sq.  nut 

Swing  % by  4 in.  Bevel  head  Sq.  nut  1^4  in.  across 

flats 

% hexagon  nut 


Jaw-bolt 


% by  3%  in. 


124  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

For  the  sake  of  standardization,  if  the  bevel  head-bolt  is 
sufficiently  strong,  the  arm  and  clamp-bolts  can  all  be  of  the 
bevel-head  type — 1 Yg  by  6%  in.  The  extra  long  nut  is  nec- 
essary for  strength  to  provide  a wide  seat  for  the  large  end 
of  the  chuck-wrench. 

The  swing-bolt  nut  now  in  use  is  a special  nut  1 % in.  across 
the  flats,  and  therefore  takes  the  small  end  of  the  chuck- 
wrench.  If  the  width  across  the  flats  of  this  nut  were  in- 
creased to  fit  the  large  end  of  the  wrench,  it  would  no  longer 
require  both  ends  of  the  wrench  to  handle  the  swing  and  clamp. 
The  thickness  of  this  nut  should  be  between  1 and  114  inches. 

31/2-Inch  Safety  Collar 

The  safety  collar  bolts  should  be  % by  5 in.,  and  inter- 
changeable with  the  column  cross-bar  bolts.  The  nuts  should 
probably  be  the  standard  square  ones.  A larger  nut  to  fit  the 
big  end  of  the  chuck-wrench  would  mean  another  special,  and 
would  necessitate  a shoulder  on  the  collar  casting;  otherwise 
it  would  be  an  improvement. 

Drifter  Cradle 

Some  standard  shape  regarding  depth,  width,  length,  and 
distance  between  standard  rod  centers,  guide-slide  dimensions, 
etc.,  should  be  adopted.  It  is  possible  that  there  should  be  two 
standard  shells — the  narrower  and  lighter  one  being  used  with 
the  smaller  machines. 

The  adjustable  guide-slide,  with  ‘shims’  to  take  care  of 
wear,  offers  advantages.  Instead  of  having  the  caps  bolted  on, 
would  it  not  be  better  to  replace  the  bolts  with  rivets  ? 

The  ends  of  the  shell  need  to  be  reversible  as  regards  the 
position  of  the  crank. 

Table  No.  4 gives  some  information  regarding  a few  of  the 
shell  castings  now  in  use. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  1 


■g  ^ d 

> O ® 

£ a ® «w 

o a -g  o 

M ,3  O 
%_i  Q< 

° > 

© a +* 

OJ  f-l  O — . 
02 


lllsSlIIII 


d 
o 
bO 

d d d d 

o O X o _ _ _ 

bJO  bfl  © bO  bo  bo  bo 

d d nr  d d d d 

X X ^ X X X X 

<d  a)  vffi  o>  p p p 

MS^SSSM 


d d d 
o o o 


05s 


_ o I J,  „ 

3sS|l 

H Sc 

Z2  T\  _ 


' 2 vM  vrf 
^ d'-  ^ 

CO  CO  CO  CO 


1 1 

o> 

M r-  O 

© 

.q  o 


© I 

p ^ GO 

S 2 .g 

fl  g ■§ 


> M 

> O 

© © a 
a 5 a 
>»  m s 
H w 


© 

© -a 

**  fe  ^ i «> 

© .£  c$  I © 

±j  © 'O  “ .3 

§•“  g % % 

u w 5 ^ -a 

S M 


d d 
p .2 
’•M  •*-> 

© p 

> > 


d d d d 

p p p p d 

+3  X>  X>  Xj  2 

a a a ;-.  .2 

p p p p a 

> > > > O 

w 


GO 


.2  3 *3 

2 g s 

>>>>,£ 
d5  -Q  ^ 

a g ,M 

vQO  V^O 

d'  ^ 

*s  * 

3 ° rO 

Is? 

^ ^ ^ 

Ill 

CO  CO  CO 

® 611 

^ g!rt  s* 

s & ja 

£ssss 


COCOc°eo'rlHTf'Tf'rfl 


© © i © 

« ^ s d 

fjj 

B 


^!  2$ 

to  to 


to  ##  3*3* 

O <M  CO  t>-  t-  t~ 
(M  <M  CO  <M<M<C<I<M 


a t-> 

p p 

bo  a 
bo  Pi 
d S 

5 u 

6 rd 

bo  bo  XI 
d d ^4 
d d o u 

£ £ ^ Q 


a 

P 

I- 

d to 


a 

p 

d 

K*> 

P Q 


CT--  Q) 

bo  P J 

5 ^ 

d oo  o 
>00^10 
K H N W 


148  Teyner  27&  4%  3%  % by  % Horizontal  1%  % by  1%  Square 


126  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

The  above  data  shows  that  the  shell  castings  of  the  Waugh 
Plugger  and  Clipper,  the  18  and  248  Leyners,  and  the  550  D 
and  148  Leyners  are  the  same.  In  the  nine  shell  castings  ex- 
amined, there  are  six  different  ones. 

Standard  Rods 

There  probably  should  be  two  standard  lengths  of  cradle 
standard  rods.  The  length  of  rod  will  vary  with  the  length  of 
steel  change.  The  diameter  of  the  standard  rods  should  be 
% in.;  square  hexagon  nuts  should  be  on  the  cross-head  end. 

If  the  side  and  cradle  standard  rods  can  be  made,  to  some 
extent,  interchangeable,  the  standard  rods  should  be  threaded 
on  one  end;  if  not  interchangeable,  the  standard  rods  should 
be  threaded  on  both  ends. 

If  the  standard  rods  are  to  be  made  interchangeable,  they 
should  be  of  the  same  material  and  given  the  same  treatment 
in  manufacturing  as  the  side-rods.  The  advantage  of  having 
these  two  parts  the  same  is  that  it  makes  one  less  rod  to  order 
and  carry  in  stock. 

Table  No.  5 gives  some  data  pertaining  to  the  standard  rods 
on  several  makes  of  cradles. 

The  above  figures  show  no  reason  why  the  standard  rods 
cannot  be  easily  standardized.  With  the  exception  of  the 
DX  61  cradle,  the  maximum  difference  in  length  of  the  stand- 
ards is  5 in.  The  DX  61  rod  extends  along  the  entire  length 
of  the  shell  casting. 

Feed-Screws 

The  details  of  the  feed-screw  such  as  the  diameter,  pitch, 
depth,  and  type  of  threads,  diameter  of  the  shafting  at  the 
forward  and  cross-head  support,  and  diameter  and  pitch  of 
the  threads  at  the  crank  connection,  should  all  be  standard- 
ized. There  must  be  about  three  standard  lengths  to  corre- 
spond with  the  lengths  of  shell  standard  rods. 

In  regard  to  the  kind  of  threads,  both  the  V and  square  type 
have  their  advantages.  Either  form  could  be  accepted  as 
standard.  The  square  threads  check  more  easily  and  there- 
fore develop  less  vibration  on  the  crank-handle.  However,  the 
square  threads  finally  wear  to  the  V shape  and  are  more  easily 
stripped. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  127 


a a 
0)  o> 

0)  Q> 

a a 
o o 

c a 
o o 

±2  •*> 
c c 


c a 

<X>  0) 


o o 

S c 

o o 


4 'i'S 

32  V S 

I & 

a 

J8 

w 


T3 

• S3  ...  . 

co  0)  co  co  w co 

T3  T3  rO  T3  T3 
33  ■£  3 3 3 3 
CI'goOVD 

,33  ,33 ,33 ,33 ,33 

O SO  O O O 
JO  O&^XiXi 

C 42  c C C C 

O O O O 

CO  <D  CO  CO  CO  CO 

-+->  (.-P-M-P-P 

3,33  3 33  3 3 


C 3 3 33g3B3S 
OOOOOOOOOO 
bobobobobotfibobobobo 
eccao3c3rt®e3eac3oJ 

ggggggggss 

kskskbbbbw 


o 2 \p 

PH  ^ \W  ^ 

. t- t- «Arf  O (M  (NJ 

a HH^NTjiNNNNN 

n >>>>2  >»>»>»>»>»>» >> 

J 

N O 

w O 


T7  H 

Si,  ® 

bfl  Q. 

Ms* 

PhU  | 

rdP3  CCS 

bo  bo^a 
§ § o 
£££ 


:r^  »H  0> 

a> 

T-i  ^3  >J  « ■ <D 

«©  g»®  JQpJ 

txj  CS^OOOOO 
HPhnWh 


fl  W U.  rt 

I ^al 

WfcH 

4>P 

c 

o 

o 

O 

Jj'S-S  „ 
Si  8.S 
§ 


•5"^ 

SS^| 

©,o  bj-§ 

“tc 

w o1-1 

E a .. 
Q © a m 

3 C 


<v 

9) 

Oi 

£ 

£ 

B 

at 

OS 

OS 

m 

xn 

00 

<M  O4aOO0(MO0  00  00  00 


i§ 


0) 

> g»  P; 

33 

0) 

33  33  33  33  33 
® Q>  fl>  V 0> 

aaaaa 

ooooo 

Open 

Open 

a 

Oi 

r*i 

S'33  E-i 
w*!3 

wi 

T5  “ 

O 

M4 

O 

Forwa 

suppor 

liameter 

inches 

§ -PS’S 


I hJSS 


*.2 

0) 


©00<£>  t-  b-C> 
CO  rH 

I II  II  II 
00  CQ  00  CO  CO  CO  CO 


.*-  *.s 

ko  «; 

i,5?« 

1 8^1 

<J-o  © g 


SUV'S  ^ 

a^-a  o ’-i 


•73  eJ 

§1 

© ■** 

^ o 


cr 

C/2 


pL,  O 

,33 
bo 
35 
C3 


Q> 

»H 

aJ 
P 
O*  O) 

M S3 

fe  §• 
aw 
a - 
•-*  %-, 
Oi 


a> 

c3 

P 

D*  <u 

oo  S 
„ e« 
° 2, 
53  & 

•P  CO 


[5 

-W  T — , b>^ 

<x)  bo  a> 

§•2*3^ 

&45Q&S 


33 

cr 

CO 

IV 

& ' « 
JQ 
00  o 

Tf  UO 
(M  lO 


<v 

33 

>> 

0) 


128  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

The  double-threaded  screw,  with  two  threads  per  inch,  seems 
to  be  in  general  use.  Table  No.  6 shows  the  diameter  of  the 
feed-screw  threads  in  the  nine  cradles  examined  to  vary  be- 
tween 1 and  1%2  inches. 

The  above  figures  show  that  in  examining  the  nine  feed- 
screws listed,  there  are  two  types  of  threads,  three  different 
diameters  of  screws,  three  depths  of  threads,  six  lengths,  five 
different  sizes  of  shafting  at  the  forward  support,  and  two 
different  pitches  of  threads  at  the  crank  connection.  In  all 
nine  sizes,  the  diameters  of  the  shaft  at  the  cross-head  bearing 
and  crank  connection  are  1 inch.  With  the  exception  of  the 
Ingersoll-Rand  plugger  cradle  screw,  all  the  others  are  nearly 
the  same  in  detail.  There  are  six  different  feed-screws  out  of 
a total  of  nine. 

All  the  figures  given  in  Table  No.  6 may  not  be  exactly  cor- 
rect, as  some  of  the  parts  measured  were  not  new,  and  wear 
may  have  developed. 

It  is  recommended,  as  mentioned  before,  that  there  be  three 
standard  lengths  of  feed-screws  and  that  the  type,  pitch,  and 
depth  of  threads  be  also  standardized.  The  diameter  of  the 
front  support  shafting  should  be  fixed  between  % and  % in. 
The  specifications  should  call  for  the  feed-screw  shaft  to  be  1 
inch  diameter  at  the  cross-head  and  at  the  crank  connection. 
The  threads  to  the  crank  should  be  the  standard  U.  S.  bolt 
threads,  which  are  eight  per  inch. 

Forward  Feed-Screw  Support 

Either  the  horizontal  or  vertical  type  can  be  accepted  as 
the  standard  form  of  support.  It  should  be  made  according 
to  the  assumed  standard  specifications  regarding  size  of  bolts, 
shape  of  nuts,  total  length,  and  height  of  bearing  above  the 
shell  bottom.  Table  No.  4 gives  some  information  of  these 
details.  Of  the  nine  cradles  examined,  there  are  six  supports 
that  differ  slightly  in  construction. 

Regardless  of  which  type  of  support  is  taken  as  the  standard 
form,  the  bearing  for  the  feed-screw  shaft  should  be  open  at 
both  ends.  The  bolts  needed  to  hold  the  support  to  the  shell 
casting  should  be  % in.  diameter,  with  square  nuts. 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  12T9 


If  this  fitting  is  necessary,  it  might  be  an  improvement  if  it 
were  riveted  instead  of  bolted  to  the  shell.  At  the  Copper 
Queen  mines,  this  part  of  the  cradle  does  not  last  very  long, 
as  it  is  taken  off  by  the  drill-runner  during  the  first  shift. 

Cross-Head 

The  cross-head  should  be  made  according  to  some  accepted 
standard  regarding  thickness,  diameter  of  bearing  for  feed- 
screw shaft,  and  distance  between  holes  for  standard  rods. 

Crank,  Crank  and  Throttle-Handle  Bolts 

The  actual  shape  of  the  crank  and  handle  makes  but  little 
difference. 

The  threads  to  fit  the  1-inch  feed-screw  shafting  should  be 
the  standard  of  eight  per  inch.  The  feed-screw  connection 
should  be  open  at  both  ends. 

Table  No.  7 gives  some  data  on  the  types  and  sizes  of  crank 
and  throttle  bolts  now  in  use. 

This  table  shows  that  each  drill  manufacturer  uses  a dif- 
ferent size  of  crank-bolt;  out  of  eight  throttle-handle  bolts, 
three  are  alike. 

From  the  above  table,  it  looks  as  if  the  throttle  handle  and 
crank-bolt  could  be  standardized  and  made  interchangeable. 
While  the  heavier  crank-bolts  with  the  special  threaded  heads 
may  have  their  advantages,  yet  the  %-in.  bolt  on  the  Waugh 
Turbro  crank  seems  to  answer  all  purposes.  It  is  suggested 
that  the  standard  throttle  and  crank-bolt  should  be  % by  2 in., 
with  square-shaped  nuts. 

Plugger-Cradle 

If  the  plugger  machine  is  the  regular  form  of  shell  plus  a 
mounting  slide,  the  cradle  itself  should  coincide  with  one  of 
the  standard  drifter  cradles.  The  diameter  of  the  bolts  that 
help  to  form  the  forward  and  rear  mounting  slide  clamps, 
should  be  % inch. 

If  the  plugger-cradle  is  of  the  slide-extension  type,  the  feed- 
screw should  be  the  shortest  adopted  length  of  the  standard 
feed-screw.  The  forward  and  rear  clamp-bolts  should  be  the 
same  size  (%-in.  diam.),  as  the  corresponding  bolts  on  the 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


130 


.2  S 

M O i>  <1> 

§|'S'P  2 

.g  c > 

w'~ 


5-g 


ft 

O’ 

oo 


09 

ft 

O’ 

09 


:w  ° 


G 

d 

G 

G 

O 

O 

O 

bfl 

bo 

03 

u 

bo 

bp 

cO 

rt 

cO 

X 

X 

X 

03 

rN 

03 

03 

a 

a 

a 

a 

g 

o 

bo 

o9 

X 

a> 

a 


>» 

X 

tH 

>> 

Xt 

r-H 

>» 

>» 

-ft 

a#! 


>» 

Xi 


p.2 


t-* 

H 

3-i 

03 

w 

G 

G 

>4 

rH 

X 

>4 

03 

C£> 

t*j 

bo 

s 

03 

|J 

Q 

o 

00 

Q 

£ 

oo 

t-H 

»o 

lO 

'T* 

rH 

G 

G 

03 

t* 

O 

bo 

O 

bo 

03 

3_ 

CO 

cO 

cO 

cO 

ft 

X 

X 

ft 

O* 

OQ 

03 

a 

03 

a 

or 

CO 

G 

O 

be 

cO 

X 

03 

a 


c 

o 

bJD 

cO 

X 

03 

a 


«j  s 


13 

PQ 

JA 

^73 
.2 'St? 

03  cO  G 

_73 

« cO  CO 

__73 

ft 

*ftlj73 

_73 

3 -Sts 

03  CO  CO 

. 73 

3^73 

03  cO  CO 

— . 73 
CO  03 

‘S'g 

2 

03  m 03 

ft 

ft  Q3  03 

ft  -ft 

ft  03  CG 
ft  £ 03 

03  0}  03 
ft  t-,  x 

ft  03  ft 
ft  t-  _ft 

0-2 

o 

CO -ft 
-tn 

CO  -ft 

-M 

to -ft -ft 

to -ft 

4-i 

CO  rG 
+» 

Mx 

4H 

« 

C^J 

rH 

rH 

rH 

rH 

▼H 

tH 

rH 

rH 

>> 

>> 

>> 

o 

>> 

>» 

>> 

>» 

>4 

X 

-ft 

-ft 

r-“ 

rO 

-ft 

X 

-ft 

-ft 

o£S 

X 

u ^ « 

Oh  o 

rG  X 
bfl  bJD 

3 ft 
cO  cO 

£ £ 


03 

G 

>> 

03 

H 


t~, 

J-i 

03 

03 

G 

G 

>» 

>> 

.3 

Q 

03 

tH 

00 

O 

oo 

uo 

■'O* 

<M 

iO 

rH 

71  Waugh  stoper  Ke  by  2 Hexagon  1 round 

16  “V”  Waugh  % by  2 Hexagon  1 round 

CC  11  I-R  Stoper  (cotter  key  y16  by  2)  % square 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  131 


other  type  of  plugger  machine  cradle.  The  slide-bolt  should 
be  the  standard  %-in.  bolt  with  a square  nut. 

It  would  make  one  less  part  to  order,  if  the  %-in.  slide  and 
safety  collar-bolts  were  of  the  same  length.  At  present  the 
slide-bolt  is  2%  in.  the  longer. 

Table  No.  8 shows  some  figures  pertaining  to  the  plugger- 
cradles. 

The  above  figures  show  that  three  out  of  four  sets  of  mount- 
ing clamps  require  different  sizes  of  bolts.  The  Jackhamer 
system  of  mounting  is  probably  the  best,  only  the  eye-bolt 
should  be  replaced  by  one  with  a regular  head.  It  is  possible 
that  by  slightly  widening  the  crank  end  of  the  Jackhamer 
shell  casting,  the  need  of  a cut  head-bolt  for  the  cross-head  can 
be  avoided.  The  size  of  the  cross-head  and  mounting  slide 
forward  clamp-bolts  can  probably  be  the  same  (%  by  about 
2 % to  3 in.) , though  this  is  a matter  of  small  importance.  The 
size  of  the  rear  clamp-bolt  can  probably  be  standardized  at 
% by  5 to  6 inches. 

The  nuts  for  the  %-in.  cross-head  bolts  should  be  the  regu- 
lar square  ones.  The  %-in.  mounting  slide  clamp-bolts  must 
have  special  square  nuts  1%  in.  across  flats,  as  are  provided 
with  the  I.-R.  cradle.  The  special  nut  fits  the  small  end  of  the 
chuck-wrench. 

The  details  of  the  feed  nut  on  the  plugger-cradles  should  be 
the  same  as  on  the  larger  drifters. 

Summary 

An  observation  of  Table  No.  9,  which  is  a combination  of 
Tables  No.  4,  5,  6,  7,  and  8,  shows  that  of  the  nine  cradles 
listed,  six  are  unlike.  The  cradles  listed  include  the  types 
that  are  required  to  mount  practically  all  classes  of  rock-drills. 
By  close  standardization,  the  number  of  different  cradles  could 
be  decreased  to  three,  and  probably  two.  The  length  of  steel 
change,  except  with  the  I.-R.  plugger-cradle,  can  be  varied 
by  using  either  of  the  two  lengths  of  standard  feed-screws. 

It  would  be  impossible  to  attempt  to  standardize  the  shape 
of  the  clamp-straps  that  hold  the  pluggers  to  the  mounting 
slide. 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


132 


si 

o z 

PQ 

<L 

< 

o 

Pi 

<1 

H 

Pi 


*5  S « 


3 -I 

eS 

be 

Qj 

Ph 


3 

bo 

a> 

P$ 


3 H 

O P 

m 2; 

Px 

S 

o 

Q 

Pi 

£ 

Pi 

o 


bfi  bfl 

O £ c3  p->  p> 

fi  S 03  Ph  Ph 


° .S3  *53 

m w § 


■8  S 1 

c o eg 


^ Q)  3 

° ,g  -g 

pq  a § 


o '5 
PQ 


3 

bfl 

a> 

Ph 


bfl 

o> 

« 


X 

X* 

X 

CD 

a> 

0) 

rr 

M 

w 

w 

in 

X 

^ c« 

CO 

to 

to 

>>  *« 
■°  g, 

>> 

rO 

>> 

42 

>> 

43 

XS 

X 

& 

X 

X* 

X 

a> 

a> 

a> 

M 

w 

w 

T3 

T3 

T3 

03 

o ^ 

V o3 
<u 

X 

o3 

0> 

-a  ^ 

03  4x 

OJ 

42 

- >» 

>»  ?> 

>> 

a> 

H ^ 

42  >> 

42 

oX 

^0  W 

W 

cr 

in 


>> 

42 

X 


X_ 

<M  <A  ^ 

>»  ’G  ^ 

? ffl  cJ 

^ a o> 

^ cq  ^ 


cr 

in 


>» 


c*  .S3  ^ 

O 03 
>>  0)  £ 
a 4Q 


ti 

t-4 

• tx 

u I 

(D 

0> 

: a> 

xi  to 

'Si  bfl 
bfl  ^ 

: a) 

^ & 

g 

03 

S 

oS 

bfi  .S 

43 

42 

3 43 

3 rt 

44 

44 

03  PL 

o3  O 

o 

O 

£ 

£ 

o3 

►-3 

o3 

>-s 

STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  133 


MACHINES 


Machine  Side-Rods 

Table  No.  10  gives  some  data  regarding  the  side-rods  on 
various  machines. 

This  table  shows  that  practically  all  the  drifter  and  stoper 
side-rods  are  %-in.  bolts.  The  plugger  machines  have  the 
lV£-in.  side-rods. 

It  is  thought  that  perhaps  the  bolts  on  the  class  of  rock- 
drills  considered  in  this  paper  can  be  limited  in  diameter  to 
% and  %-inch.  Is  it  practical  to  put  % or  %-in.  side-rods  on 
the  plugger  drills? 

From  the  figures  in  Table  No.  10  it  appears  as  if  it  would  be 
possible  to  do  some  work  in  standardizing  the  side-rod  bolts. 
In  the  list  are  included  machines  with  rifle-bar,  front-head, 
and  turbine  rotation.  The  smaller  plugger  side-rods  are  prac- 
tically the  same  in  all  respects.  There  is  little  difference  given 
between  the  lengths  of  the  rods  on  the  various  drifters  and 
stopers  that  have  through  side-rods. 

A part  standardization  of  the  side-rod  bolts  would  not  affect 
the  design  of  the  drill  to  any  extent.  It  would  be  possible,  in 
many  cases,  to  vary  slightly  the  length  of  the  spring  as  well  as 
the  position  of  the  retaining  lugs  on  the  front-head  forging. 
As  mentioned  before,  the  most  commonly  used  length  of  side 
and  standard  rods  could  be  more  interchangeable.  The  nuts 
on  the  side-rods  must  be  haxagon  shaped. 

Exhaust 

The  threads  on  the  valve  exhaust-port  should  be  the  %-in. 
standard  pipe-thread. 

Valve-Chest 

In  Table  No.  11  is  given  some  data  pertaining  to  the  valve- 
chest  bolts.  (See  page  138.) 


FORWARD  CLAMP-BOLT  REAR  CLAMP-BOLT 


134 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


8 1 a 


Eh  -a 

p 

fc 


h » 
jg  H 

3 

3 . 

<u 

be 

bO  bo 

g 

a> 

a>  a> 

a$ 

Op 

tf  Ph 

* 

x x . 

a>  0. 

W W M 


ii  <u 

o JS 
« § 


V- 

_ «N 

O0 

>>’§  >> 
ft'0 
CQ 


CD 

o 

lO 

>> 


bO 

0) 


tub 

CD 


O' 

m 

x 

a> 

w 


T> 

aJ 

CD  rd 

>> : 
^2  ? 


-d 

be 

3 

03 

& 


a> 

a 

a 


O 


0) 

g 

Cj 
bO  ^ 

g ^ 

c3  o 
> 03 


O 

tx 

d2 


H 

a> 

a> 

Eh  aJ 

d 

d 

_ d 

>» 

rd  >j 

<u 

<D 

bo  a? 

Q 

§ ^ 

oo 

o 

00 

00 

1-0 

t>  rH 

<M 

Ub 

H 

(Threaded 

head)  ( Same 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  135 


s d 
m o ® 
a> 
• - £3 
« O 

” d g 
o a>  o 


<J2 

cax 

a) 


w 2 

x 

X*  X 

X 

X 

X 

X* 

X 

x‘ 

^ S O -2 

<D 

a>  a> 

<P 

<D- 

a> 

a> 

a> 

o 

« Eh  g 

w 

w « 

w 

M 

w 

w 

w 

ffi 

TJ 

eS 

* 

. 

t- 

t- 

o 

(M 

03 

03 

03 

■P  o +?  $ 

W . - j; 

rH 

>i 

rH 

>J 

>> 

<M 

>» 

03 

>> 

<M 

>» 

03 

>> 

<M 

>> 

8 2 « 

.2  J2  c 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X! 

X 

X 

02  •- 

S? 

« 

-u>  t-i  a)  o 

^ ^ 2 

i— 4 

CM  00 

00 

03 

oo 

oo 

00 

OO 

m r. 

c ^ 
a 
o 
U 


c ° *3  J! 
2 i 8 § 
° Q Jc  ” 


o 

£ .2 

H P 

ft5 

O 

m 

P 

H 

H 

fc 


O 


■e  m 

o g 

a 

o« 

3-S 


. b2  to 

& o c « 
at  a *3 

&S  « 


i O * 


M 

P J3 


at  to 


a & V . g 

<5Q1 


g « - T>  ^ J 

°n  o <b  2 o 

a P at  w c 
<J  “ 

«d  A ^ 

rt  O 3 £ 

J3  O j 

m 'O  C 


v- 

f*V\ 


•6  & .a 

S 2 

z 8 s 

o 


25 

* 

* 

CO 

00  o 

00 

CO 

t- 

t> 

as 

Oi 

1 

’-I 

1 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

CO 

1 1 

CO  <M 

00 

1 

CO 

1 

C0‘ 

00 

00 

1 

CO 

VD 

* 

99 

«c 

sll 

rH 

rH  rH 

rH 

rH 

t-H 

rH 

rH 

i-4 

0) 

a>  a> 

0) 

0) 

<u 

o> 

j_  a 

tH 

Sh 

tH 

tH 

CG 

ca  ca 

Cj 

08 

CtJ 

OJ 

•v 

•* 

3 

3 2. 

3 

3 

3 

31 

> 

> 

o1 

o'  cr 

cr 

cr 

O' 

O' 

GO 

m cq 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

tn 

a 

o 

a> 

<u  : 

bX) 

G,  : 

X 

tH 

bo 

ft  • 

3 

s 

O | 

3 

H 

tH 

0) 

tH 

(D 

C 

tH 

as 

d 

X 

x ca 

X 

d 

>> 

>» 

as 

>» 

0) 

bJQ 

3S 

W)  X 

3 x 

CO  bO 

3 

os 

_5 

►P 

Q 

1 J 

ca 

ca  o 

«a 

00 

C 

I 00 

&4 

C 

1 £ 

oo 

rH 

Tjt 

(M 

to  -rft 

UO  rH 

SHELL  CASTING 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


136 


,£3  £ -tj 

1|§IJ 


CO  CO 


*9  £ 

S'S  S <5  £5  $ ’ 

O 8*gJ 


fl  S3 
S Q) 
_ a a 
0^00 

^f|| 


T3  2 «'§  ► 

ja 


m C 0> 

J! 

S ps’p*  S,^00^ 


c.2£cowcoco 


O 


CO  CO  co  CO 


S3 

O S3  S3 

a O 0)  g 

O ex  a CL 

. O O g1 

N . . 

'gt  t tj 


^ t>>  ^ [>, 


S3 
S3  O 
o>  a 
a o 
o . 

. N 

11 


v- 

tH  ^ 

S>>  t>> 

t>> 

w 

H 

OT 

^ « 
3 c 

^3rQ 

^2 

03  V 

X 

-S  0) 

aa 

co^-^^  ^CO 


^5-  M's  ^ 

CO  CO  ^ • 


O 0) 
§1 
§§ 


S rO  TS 
c«  S3  S3 
O O O 
O'  m m 
00  S3  S3 
3 0 0 


ss'g 

71  ^ 

Mf£' 

T3  •- 

&V, 

<D  S3 

^ * 

+3  <D 

O S3 

S3  S3  d 
O o OI  S3 
w g g 

■XJ  T3  i— >.tH  O O 

HH&KWW 


S3  S3  S3  S3  g g 
OOOOOO 
bX)  bX)  bX>  bX)  bX)  bX) 

d d a cJ  c3  cJ 

ggggss 

SESKKK 


.TO 

a 2 


13th  I 
•si*  a 

(D  Wr-^ 

wWW 


S3 

O 

bX3 

C3 

X 

<D 

w 


-u 

O 

£l 

S3 

O 

m 

T3 

c3 

o 

£h 

A 

Eh 


o 

o 

a 

3/2 


S3  S3  S3  S3 
OOOO 

bo  bo  bfl  bx> 

r2  c3  c3  cb 
X X X X 
OOOO 

WKKK 


X 


C~  00  co  >0  tr~  i-H 1 

hcjmhM 

►>»  K*J  !>1  K>>  £"> 

33  rO  ,jQ  rO  rO 


'O 

S3 

c3 

2£^*S 


00  04  co  00 


^ b*.  b>.  t>.  St*  S^4  S?  S^* 

rQ  33,0^^ 

VvoOVOON^y  VtN^lN^Vl 

CON  ilO\  U5\  »a\  °ON  M \ M > 


%-i  £_i 
<D  Q) 
be  Q, 

So 

r0^3 

bo  bo 
S O 
cS  c3 

££ 


6 
■s 

£ s 

■ S3 
so  bo  o 

o£2 


o 
S3 
>> 
o _ 

JQ 

00  o 

UO 
04  UO 


o 

S3 

>» 

O 


o ^ 

£ bO 
-0  S3 

~ 

E-H  FTZS  CL> 

. _ a S3 

so  bo^  oQ  J 

xJ?^000 


M 

03 
h H 

O pH 

£ o 

>»  E-t 
O rr 


C/3 

^ 03 

2*  H 

^j'g  O 

^§3  ■ 

CS  04  Oh  CO 

- 


OO  lO  tJ< 

HlOH 


SoqSQ  q§wp 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  137 


If  the  !/2-in  bolts  are  to  be  eliminated,  the  valve  and  motor- 
chest  bolts  will  have  to  be  % and  % in-  No  standardization 
of  these  parts  other  than  of  the  bolt  diameter  can  be  attempted. 
The  special  shaped  bolt-heads  should  be  avoided. 

In  the  case  of  the  18  Leyner  the  valve-chest  stud-bolts  often 
turn  when  the  nuts  are  moved.  It  would  perhaps  be  an  im- 
provement if  the  valve-chest  casting  were  slightly  increased 
in  width,  and  the  V2-in.  bolts  replaced  by  %-in.  size. 

Feed-Nut  and  Parts 

The  feed-nut  washer  and  lock-nut  should  be  of  the  design 
and  size  that  was  accepted  as  standard. 

The  following  table  lists  some  of  the  feed-nut  details : 

TABLE  NO.  12 

Total  length.  Hexagon  lock-nut  across 


Machine  inches  flats — inches 

Waugh  plugger 4 

Waugh  clipper 4 1^ 

Jackhamer 2 

DX  61 4^  1% 

Waugh  turbro 4 

18  Leyner 4^  2 

550  D 4^  2 

148  Leyner 4>£  2 


It  would  be  a slight  advantage  if  the  lock-nut  were  about 
1%  in.  across  flats.  It  would  then  fit  the  large  end  of  the 
chuck-wrench. 

On  the  I.-R.  550  D it  is  important  that  the  needle-valve 
bushing  and  lock-nut  can  be  handled  by  either  the  % or  %-in. 
wrench.  The  details  of  the  bushing  and  nut  are : 


Size,  inches  Threads  per  inch  Heads  across 

Part  flats — inches 

Valve  bushing lz/u  by  1 14  % 

Lock-nut 14  IK 


As  they  are  now  made,  the  head  on  the  valve  bushing  is  too 
large  for  the  %-in.  bolt-wrench,  and  the  lock-nut  head  is  lie-in. 
too  large  for  the  %-in.  wrench. 

Plugger  Handle-Bolts 

On  page  139  are  a few  figures  regarding  the  plugger  handle- 

bolts. 


138 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


O 

•5’ 

*3 


W 2 
2 w 
23 


m cn  m > 
Ox  oo  <3 

oo  o _ P 

HH  M t”1  3 

r Os  w 


O 

X 

o>  § 


cr  cr 
*< 
to  to 


cr  cr 
*<  *< 
Ox  tO 


' ? 

cr  cr  cr  3 

<<<<<<  <d 

03  OX  CO 


w w 

cd 

X ^ 

p p 

orq  flg 
O O 
3 3 


w w 

CD  CD 
X X 
P P 
Orq  orq 
O O 
S3  3 


tn  w « 

* § * 
p p p 
orq  Orq  orq 

o o ° 
3 3 3 


in  m 

cX-  f-r- 
C 3 O 
CL  a 3 
81  * cr 
o 


3"  P 
CD 

3 ^ 

CL  p 

S“  3 

St 


HS? 

ef  3 w 

3 


cn 


02 

*3 

CD 

O 

P] 

< 

P^ 

T 

? 


GO 

<~x- 

3 

CL 

cr 

o 


cr 


cr 

v; 

CO 


ffl 

CD 

X 

P 

crq 

O 

3 


in 

•o 

CD 

2. 

p] 

cr 

CD 

P 

CL 


W 

CD 

X 

P 

oq 

O 

3 


>3 

CD 

o 


Valve-chest  Bolt Motor-chest  Bolt- 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  139 


TABLE  NO.  13 


Machine  Bolt,  inches  Nut 

DP  33 A by  13  A Hexagon 

NRW  93 A by  13  A Square 

BCRW  430 A by  12  A Square 

Clipper A by  15  Square 


The  diameter  of  the  handle-bolt  can  probably  be  increased 
to  %-in.  It  looks  as  if  a bolt  % by  about  lt/4-in.  could  be 
taken  as  the  standard.  The  nut  should  be  square. 

Air  Connections 

It  is  a matter  of  choice  between  the  bent  nipple  and  pipe 
fitting  connection.  The  bent  nipple  is  neater,  and  it  probably 
offers  less  resistance  to  the  air  than  does  the  same  size  connec- 
tion made  up  of  pipe  fittings.  The  sharper  the  curvature  of 
the  nipple,  the  less  room  will  be  taken  up  by  the  fitting. 

The  size  of  the  air  connections  will  depend  on  the  air  con- 
sumption of  the  machine.  The  two  standard  sizes  should  per- 
haps be  and  %-inch. 

The  air-swivel  connection  nut,  or  bushing,  can  probably  be 
made  one  standard  size  to  serve  both,  the  14  and  %-in.  fittings. 
The  head  of  the  swivel-nut  should  fit  either  the  large  or  small 
end  of  the  chuck-wrench.  The  shape  of  the  head  should  be 
haxagon,  with  lls/w  or  1,4-in.  across  flats. 

There  does  not  seem  to  be  any  reason  why  the  threads  on 
the  swivel-nut  cannot  be  made  to  correspond  with  standard 
pipe-threads.  There  is  some  doubt  about  the  advisability  of 
standard  pipe-threads  when  the  cylinder  is  a casting.  Stand- 
ard pipe-threads  for  the  air  connections  are  now  used  on  many 
of  the  plugger  and  stoper-drills. 

Parallel  threads  will  have  to  be  used  on  the  hose  nut  end  of 
the  air-spud.  No  bushing  should  be  needed  to  fasten  the  spud 
to  the  nipple  or  pipe  fittings  that  lead  to  the  drill.  The  hex- 
agon head  on  the  air-spud  should  be  1%-in.  across  flats  to  fit 
the  large  end  of  the  chuck-wrench. 

The  air-connection  nut  should  be  either  of  the  lugged  or 
hexagon  type,  and  be  of  such  size  as  to  permit  turning  by  the 
chuck-wrench  if  necessary. 

The  inside  diameter  of  the  hose  should  approach  the  size  of 
the  hose  as  nearly  as  possible. 


140  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Table  No.  14  lists  more  information  on  the  details  of  the 
air-swivel  nut  and  air-hose  spud. 

This  table  shows  that  the  swivel-nuts  are  interchangeable 
between  the  DT  42  and  DT  44,  also  between  the  Waugh  Tur- 
bro  and  71  Drills.  The  Clipper,  CC  11,  NRW  93,  and  DP  33 
require  only  the  standard  %-in.  pipe  nipple  to  connect  the  air 
to  the  machine.  None  of  the  swivel-nut  heads  make  an  exact 
fit  with  the  chuck-wrench. 

The  six  air-hose  spuds  listed  are  all  different.  None  of  the 
spud-heads  are  the  exact  size  to  fit  the  large  end  of  the  chuck- 
wrench.  That  the  I.-R.  spud  has  not  taper  threads  to  the  nut 
is  the  only  difference  between  it  and  Briggs  standard  l^-in. 
pipe  fitting.  Parallel  threads  are  necessary  on  account  of  ex- 
cessive wear  from  frequent  use. 

Air-Filter 

The  form  of  air-filter  is  a matter  of  choice.  In  some  of  the 
T-shaped  types  it  is  too  easy  a matter  to  remove  the  screen. 
The  T filter  with  a plug  promotes  oiling  through  the  hose. 

The  I.-R.  air-filter  No.  27631  could  be  improved  by  adding 
a small  lug  to  the  casting  to  prevent  the  screen  from  dropping 
out  of  place.  There  are  other  types  of  filters  which  do  not 
require  a screen  of  special  shape. 

There  are  a few  miscellaneous  bolts,  nuts,  bushings,  etc., 
that,  for  the  sake  of  uniformity,  should  be  made  to  fit  one  of 
the  wrenches  on  hand. 

The  stoper-handle  nut,  to  fit  the  chuck-wrench,  needs  to  be 
1%-in.  across  flats.  The  handle  nut  on  the  CC  11,  16  V,  DT  42, 
DT  44,  and  Waugh  71  is  the  proper  size. 

Some  of  the  stopers  require  chuck  retaining  bolts.  The 
chuck-bolt  details  on  a few  of  the  machines  are  as  follows : 


Size  of 

Machine  bolt,  inches  Nut  Remarks 

Waugh  71 y by  5}i  Hexagon  Nuts  on  both 

16V y by  4 Hexagon  ends. 

CC  11 y by  by  Hexagon 


It  appears  as  if  the  same  size  of  bolt,  with  a square  nut,  can 
be  used  for  the  safety  collar  and  chuck. 


Swivel  -Nut^or  Bushing 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  141 


M .S3  5 a> 

j-sl-g 

33  tf  c 

s s | “ 


&| 


os 

a> 

S 

OS 

Q)  0)  <d 

ft  ft  ft  ft 

ft  ft  a ft  ft 

g £ g £ g 


<KJ  T— I 1— ( I— I 


^ ^ ^ (M 


O' 

a 

cs 

Q 'o  & 
ft  0)  SO. 
ft  a'S  & 


g £ 


* 


3 

A 

^ . 

O 'S 

Cl  in 
ft  « ^3  ® 
£ ft  ft 

yi W '§j  £ 


\^*  «©  *o 


T3 

w -m  « X 

§ g 1 2 * 

| o£  S00^ 
«.,  E-i  Eh  a 
*< 


(J>  a)  <o  \ ~ M 

s -g  ^ ^ ^ 


.2  c 
<q  « 


-g  & 8 

i ?•§ 

® fc  .£ 

J | js 
w « « 


r— I 01  H H CO 


S3  S3  S3  S3 

O O O O ^ 

bfl  bfl  feu  bfl  ^ 

OS  03  tf  rt  » 

X X X X P 

a)  a>  a>  a>  o 

W W W W P3 


<M 


S3 

O 

to 

a 

g 

w 


w 
05 
W 
Pm 

ol  “ 

O 00 
U3  T#< 

t-H  io 


o 

U fc- 


S3  S3  S3 
O O O 
bO  W)  bfi 
oS  03  cS 
XXX 
<d  a>  a> 

WWW 


M 

03 

rf 

W 

o 

TJ 

o 

S3 

p 

OS 

-3 

Oh 

CO 

00 

Oi  ►> 

^ w 

pH  w 

Q W 


a> 
ft 

O & 
Q O 


S3  S3 
«s  rt 

£?  > > 
W « 3 3 
h^wm 


142 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


The  cradle  clamp-bolts  on  the  Waugh  Turbro  drill  are: 

Rear  clamp-bolt,  % by  6%  in.,  hexagon  nut  on  both  ends. 

Front  clamp-bolt,  % by  514  in.,  head  on  one  end. 

On  the  148  and  248  Leyners  the  valve-head  bolt-nut  is  hex- 
agon in  shape  and  l^e  in.  across  flats.  It  fits  the  large  end  of 
the  chuck-wrench. 

Throttle- Valve  Handle 

No  attempt  has  been  made  to  standardize  the  details  of  the 
throttle-handle.  At  present,  few  of  the  handles  are  inter- 
changeable. Table  No.  7 calls  attention  to  the  varying  shape 
of  valve-stems. 

Water-Valve 

The  standard  make  of  %-in.  brass  needle-valve  costs  mate- 
rially less  than  the  rock-drill  manufacturers’  valve.  The 
standard  brass  valve  gives  just  as  satisfactory  service  as  the 
more  expensive  product.  The  threads  on  the  steel  valve  rust 
quickly.  The  valve-stem  cap  should  be  1%  in.  across  flats,  as 
it  is  on  most  of  the  valves  in  use  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines. 

If  it  were  not  for  pipe-scale  getting  in  the  valve-seat,  it 
would  be  an  improvement  to  have  the  hose-stems  fixed  to  the 
valve.  This  would  prevent  the  miner  from  disconnecting  the 
water-hose  at  the  valve.  The  hose-stem  made  out  of  %-in. 
pipe-nippel  is  more  satisfactory  than  the  more  expensive  stem 
with  the  shoulders.  The  shoulders  too  readily  permit  the  use 
of  a wrench  to  break  the  water  connection  at  the  valve  instead 
of  at  the  spud.  The  “goose-neck”  and  valve  should  at  all  times 
stay  on  the  hose,  and  not  on  the  rock-drill. 

The  most  satisfactory  form  of  water-valve  handle  would  be 
the  one-ended  lever  shape ; that  is,  similar  to  the  shape  of  the 
throttle-valve  handle.  The  cross-bar  and  wheel  forms  of 
handle  are  too  easily  caught  when  dragging  the  hose. 

Conclusions 

To  standardize  drilling  machines  it  is  essential  that  the 
manufacturers  adopt  the  same  specifications  in  making  the 
fittings  used  on  rock-drills.  As  nearly  as  possible  the  spuds, 
air-swivel  nut,  back-head  cap,  back-head  plug,  oil-plugs,  etc., 
should  be  interchangeable  between  the  drifters,  stopers,  and 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DR II JANG  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  148 


plugger-drills.  Special  threads,  bolts,  and  nuts  should  be 
avoided  except  where  they  are  absolutely  necessary.  As  few 
sizes  of  bolts,  nuts,  and  bushings  should  be  used  as  is  practical. 
Not  more  than  two  sizes  of  guide-shells  should  be  standard- 
ized. There  should  be  three  lengths  of  feed-screw,  and  two 
lengths  of  standard  rods. 

It  is  important  that  all  bolt-nuts,  bushings,  and  spud-heads 
subject  to  severe  usage  should  fit  the  chuck-wrench.  The  most 
important  fittings  to  be  handled  by  the  large  end  of  the  chuck- 
wrench  are  the  square  nuts  on  the  arm,  clamp,  and  swing-bolts. 
It  is  also  necessary  that  the  large  end  of  the  wrench  fit  the 
head  of  the  air-swivel  nut,  air-spud,  and  valve-head  nut. 

Among  the  parts  for  the  small  end  of  the  chuck-wrench  to 
take  care  of,  are  the  water-connection  nut,  back-head  cap, 
safety-collar  nuts,  oil-plugs,  water-valve  cap,  and  perhaps  the 
side-rod  bolt-head,  the  slide  and  clamp-nuts  on  the  plugger- 
cradle. 

To  handle  the  smaller  nuts  about  the  machine  one  other  two- 
ended  wrench  will  be  required.  If  bolts  are  necessary  to 

the  drill  construction,  this  smaller  French  can  be  made  three- 
ended.  In  designing  this  wrench  it  must  be  remembered  that 
one  end,  probably  the  %-in  bolt  end,  will  have  to  be  so  placed 
as  to  allow  its  handling  the  back-head  plug. 

To  eliminate  the  monkey-wrench,  a box-wrench  will  be 
needed  to  take  care  of  the  drill-steel.  This  wrench  can  prob- 
ably be  placed  between  the  jaws  of  one  of  the  regular  wrenches. 

In  this  discussion  it  has  been  suggested  that  to  reduce  the 
number  of  size  of  bolts,  nuts,  etc.,  the  parts  listed  below  might 
be  made  as  follows: 

Size  of  bolt,  % by  5 in.,  square  nut; 

Column  cross-bar  bolts; 

Safety-collar  bolts; 

Stoper  chuck  retaining-bolts ; 

Size  of  bolt,  1%  by  6%  in.,  possibly  bevel  head,  special  nuts; 

Arm-bolts ; 

Special  square  nut  for  the  %-in.  swing-bolt  to  be  the  same  distance 
across  flats  as  arm  and  clamp-bolts ; 

Size  of  bolt,  % by  2 in.,  square  nut; 

Throttle  handle  bolt; 

Crank-bolt; 

1 in.,  % in.,  and  % in.  clamp-bolts; 

Size  of  bolt,  % by  1 in.,  hexagon  nut; 

Cradle  standard  rods;  and 

Machine  side-rods. 


144  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

On  the  Ingersoll-Rand  cradle,  it  may  be  possible  to  use  the 
same  size  of  bolts  for  the  mounting  slide-clamps,  cross-head, 
and  feed-screw  support. 

Having  the  use  of  two  wrenches,  one  a chuck-wrench  with 
l15/ie  and  1%6-in.  jaw  openings,  the  other  a lighter  weight 
double  ended  % and  %-in.  bolt-wrench,  the  sizes  of  bolts 
nuts,  etc.,  in  Tables  15  and  16  have  been  suggested. 

Drill-Steel 

All  the  drill-steel  used  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines  pass 
through  a centrally  located  surface  shop,  which  is  within  a 
few  feet  of  one  of  the  principal  shafts.  With  the  exception  of 
the  drill-steel  used  in  that  division  of  the  mine,  it  all  has  to  be 
transferred  daily  each  way  by  auto-truck  between  the  mines 
and  the  sharpening  shop.  The  drill-steel  is  handled  between 
the  shaft-collar  and  the  underground  tool-racks  by  the  mine 
tool  nippers. 

There  are  now  in  use  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines  four  dif- 
ferent kinds  of  drill-steel.  Among  the  disadvantages  of  not 
having  one  standard  form  of  drill-steel  are : 

(1)  To  permit  proper  distribution  with  the  various  kinds 
of  steel  in  use,  it  is  necessary  that  careful  sorting  and  counting 
be  done  by  both  the  mine  and  shop  nippers. 

(2)  The  use  of  several  kinds  of  steel  places  more  labor  and 
responsibility  upon  the  underground  tool  nippers. 

(3)  With  several  kinds  of  steel  in  the  rack,  it  is  necessary 
that  the  drill-runner  should  be  more  careful  in  his  selection  of 
the  steel  for  the  shift’s  work.  If  there  were  but  one  kind  of 
steel  in  use  in  the  mine,  the  drill-man  would  have  a larger  sup- 
ply from  which  to  choose. 

(4)  With  various  kinds  of  steel  to  be  sharpened,  the  shop 
loses  more  time  in  frequently  having  to  change  dies,  dollies, 
blocks,  and  formers.  The  additional  supply  of  tools  required 
means  more  expense.  In  the  shop  it  is  not  only  necessary  to 
sort  out  the  various  lengths,  but  the  different  sizes  of  steel  as 
well.  When  different  sizes  of  drill-steel  are  in  use,  the  lengths 
of  starters,  size  of  bits,  and  length  of  change  are  likely  to  be 
different  for  the  various  steels, 


TABLE  NO.  15 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  145 


% 

3 

& m "S 

§ 

-S-Ss 

J J w 


II 

-3  X) 

U OJ 
3 


3 
3 CO 


2 2 
*3  '3 

3 3 

a a 

CO  CO 


•3 

iJl 

^5 

3 

pM 

o 

•d 

3 3 3 

3 

3 

2 03 

3 

3 

3 

3 3 3 

3 

,3 

■g  2 

-3 

-3 

,3 

-3  ,3  ,3 

-3 

3 

" -B  . 

3 

D.  J 

3 

3 

3 3 3 

3 

3 _ 42 

z u 


i^s  <^s  ws 


^ ^ ^ X ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 


T3 

a? 

be 

tc 

3 3 

O O 
bA  be 

3 

(h 

3 

O 

be 

3 

*4 

3 

S— . 

3 

S-. 

3 

® §) 

2 

3 

£ | 

3 

J-, 

3 

*H 

3 

v 

3 

t-i 

3 

>i 

3 

t- 

aJ  3 

3 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 3 

3 

3 g 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

^ n 

3 

X 

3 

3 

3 

3 * 

3 

3 £ 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

f_ 

O Q> 

w w 

O* 

3 

CT 

O* 

cr 

cr 

cr 

cr  m 

cr 

cr 

cr 

cr 

cr 

cr 

o 

CO 

ffl 

02 

02 

00 

co  W 

CO 

co  W 

02 

CO 

CO 

CO 

02 

02 

M c 


<X> 

>» 

,3 


«£> 


rQ 

35 


^ lO 
CO  <N 

>>  £ >» 

^ 


w - 

uo  ^ U5 

03  WWW 

>> 

pQ  -Qrfi43  ^ 


-v> 

3 

i 1 

3 3 

_•  be  •; 

3-2  : 

3 Q.  TO 

3 

X3 

r3  _* 

— 3 
■3  > 

$ 

3 3 3 

2 Sp? 

3 

Q. 

ft*£ 

O 

p? 

i A e 

£ 

2 £ 

2 

Vi 

33  § 

3 3 2 

< 

3 < 

c 

m m o 

TABLE  NO.  15— (Continued) 


146 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


td 


G G g 

g -g  g a, 

« B)  ^ Cfl 

rt  2 rt  . ^ 
o ^ "S  ^ ^ 
<U  A O ® 2 

a-g  a 2 g 

IB  2 M rfl  i 

,0  w 0 0 


O 

<D 

a 

^TO, 

o 

^3 

O 


^ 02  CO  2*5  J 


§ 

,G  £ 

<y  o 


5R  ^ ^ J 


o o 

rG  -? 

w o 
CO  CO 


» 2*  ^ 


G 

O 

bo 

c3 

X 

o 

w 


X X 

® QJ 

W W 

GOO 

I 2 S 2 § 

5 c«  cs  «t 

X 3 3 

® 3 3 


Wo1  o* 

CO  CO  02  CO 


G 3 

& .5* 


G g G fl  G G G 

oP.ooo.op 
bfi  bO  bfl  bfl  ^ bflbfi 

a3<3cdcd®Gej<S 

S J S £ S g S S 


^ >> 
^ ,n 


^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 


03  t; 

4J  G 

® G 

*4 -a 

o 'd  o 

: G G ^ 4i  ^ 

W *G  5 rr-J  J3  I 

■G  o -G  H G .2 


P »-.»-.  ® 


V ai  D t 

i a a g .S  2 

T3  o O cJ  S S 

• h +J  +J  -P  t>  fT* 

72  co  co  co  co  E-< 


M 

a 

s 

Is 

o o 
S3  bO 


o ® 
® o 

.2  A 
£ £ 
G ® 

H > 


3 


o » 


bO 

G 

s 

03 

G 

pO 

® 

,>  TJ 

cS  G 

> a 

I M 

2 A 

•tJ  Q) 

® -G 
£ & 


a 

I 8 
■§4 

Cl  ^5 

P > 

o o 

-U  -pa 
ea  ca 


Number  of  Different  forms 

fittings  or  Part  now  in  use  Standardized  to 

machines  examined 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  147 


-U 

3 

4-> 

3 

-U 

3 

4-> 

3 

O 

& 

i 

c 

1 

X! 

a 

a 

g 

3 

S 

s 

3 

J3 

3 

c« 

3 

H 

Xi 

3 

3 

CO 

cc3 

o 

-M 

to 

os 

CO 

OS 

oi 

c« 

a; 

ccJ 

C3 

<x> 

o> 

£ 

a) 

a> 

s 

CJ 

s 

ca 

cJ 

CO 

s 

Cj 

s 

CS 

H H N W 

CQ  H H H 

i—l  r-H 

rH  CO 

CO 

3 


r}<  ^ 00 


io  N h co  io  » » eo  w 


M W H H 


Ph  Ph  CO 

^»Mt*HO)0)05HHHHOV0505  00  00^®HHWMHH 


TABLE  NO.  16— (Continued) 


148 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


o 

N M 


>> 

'S 

o 

c 

o 

u* 

l* 

& 

Q> 

"c 

o 

<x> 

a 

a 

73 

.2 

.2 

c 

K3 

X 

' — ' 

H CO 

CO  r-i 

CO 

O 

X! 


OiUlCOWMrtHOONNOHH® 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  149 


(5)  As  the  number  of  any  one  class  of  rock-drills  in  use  in 
the  mine  will  vary  from  time  to  time,  there  will  often  be  an 
excess  or  shortage  of  one  or  more  kinds  of  drill-steel. 

Steel  Used  in  the  Copper  Queen  Mines 

The  four  kinds  of  steel  now  in  use  in  the  Copper  Queen 
mines  are  as  follows : 

(a)  For  use  in  drifting  machines : 

li/4-in.  round  hollow  steel  with  the  regular  Leyner 
shanks. 

(b)  For  use  in  wet  stopers : 

%-im  hexagon  hollow  steel  with  a plain  shank. 

(c)  For  use  in  dry  stoping: 

1-in.  cruciform  solid  steel  with  a plain  shank. 

(d)  For  use  in  plugger  machines: 

%-in.  hexagon  hollow  steel  with  the  regular  Jack- 
hamer  collar-shank. 

Table  No.  17,  page  767  lists  the  length  of  change,  length  of 
starter-drill,  diameter  of  starter-bit,  weight  of  the  steel  bar 
per  foot,  and  the  width  of  the  wings  of  the  bit  for  the  various 
kinds  of  drill-steel  now  in  use  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines. 

The  above  figures  show  the  frequency  with  which  the  fittings 
on  the  mechanical  sharpener  must  be  changed.  At  present, 
about  1250  pieces  of  steel  pass  through  the  sharpening  shop 
per  24  hours.  Of  this  total,  500  are  1*4 -in.  Leyner  steel. 

Throughout  the  Copper  Queen  mines  the  ground  is  very 
changeable;  there  is  much  ground  that  is  either  “ravelly”  or 
very  soft.  Either  of  these  conditions  would  prohibit  the  use  of 
plain  shanked  steel  in  the  drifter  and  plugger  machines.  In 
general,  lug-shanked  steel  would  be  an  improvement  over  the 
present  form  of  stoper  steel. 

During  the  last  few  months  [to  Nov.,  1920],  tests  were  made 
in  one  division  of  the  mines  with  the  idea  of  replacing  the 
four  kinds  of  drill-steel  now  in  use  by  1-inch  round  hollow 
steel  with  lugged  shanks.  To  give  the  necessary  strength,  the 
lug  on  the  1-in.  steel  is  1 in.  long,  while  the  lug  on  the  1%-in. 
shank  is  only  % in.  long.  If  the  1-inch  round  steel  were 
adopted,  the  Leyner  man  would  have  to  handle  only  steel  that 


150 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


Q)  H 
o.  ~ 


00 

Oi 

CO 


00  CO 
O OJ 
03  ci 


6 


w 


w N CO 


s J3  00  W w 
3 w T-t  ,-H 


*0Q  •» 

T3  c3 
C .O 


£ 

jo 

'o 

JS 

T3 

c 

o 


£ T3 

o a 

£3  O 
O TO 


c 

o 

bo 

rt 

X 

a> 

ffl 


s 

Fh 

o 

’C 


o 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  151 

weighs  about  2%  lb.  per  foot,  while  the  1%-in.  steel  now  in 
use  weighs  nearly  4 lb.  per  foot.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
stoper  and  plugger-steel  weights  would  be  slightly  increased; 
but  the  difference  would  be  of  no  consequence,  as  a 7%-ft  (5th 
size)  1-in.  drill-steel  is  not  difficult  to  handle. 


TABLE 

NO.  18 

1 In.  Round  Hollow 

1M  In.  Round  Hollow 

Weight, 

Weight, 

Drill 

Length 

pounds 

Drill 

Length 

Pounds 

ft.-in. 

ft.-in. 

Starter... 

2-6 

6.2 

Starter 

3-0 

11.9 

2nd 

3-9 

9.3 

2nd 

4-6 

17.9 

3rd 

5-0 

12.4 

3rd 

6-0 

23.9 

4th 

6-3 

15.5 

4th 

7-6 

29.8 

5th 

7-6 

18.6 

Total... 

62.0 

Total 

83.5 

Drill 

% In.  Hexagon  Hollow 

Weight, 
Length  Pounds 

Drill 

1 In.  Crucifrom  Solid 

Weight, 
Length  Pounds 

ft.-in. 

ft.-in. 

Starter... 

2-6 

5.2 

Starter 

3-0 

6.7 

2nd 

3-9 

7.8 

2nd 

4-3 

9.5 

3rd 

5—0 

10.4 

3rd 

5-6 

12.3 

4 th 

6-3 

13.1 

4th 

6-9 

15.1 

5th 

7-6 

15.6 

Total.. 

52.1 

Total.... 

43.6 

Table  No.  18  shows  that  with  the  adoption  of  1-inch  round 
steel  there  would  probably  not  be  a saving  in  the  weight  of 
steel  required  to  supply  the  mines.  The  1-inch  round  steel 
would  be  more  easily  bent  than  the  steel,  but  would  be 

- harder  to  bend  than  the  7/s-in.  hexagon  steel. 

That  the  round  steel  with  the  lugged  shank,  rather  than  the 
plain  shank  hexagon  steel,  has  been  tried  is  due  to  the  char- 
acter of  the  ground  in  the  Copper  Queen  mines,  and  that  the 
round  section  is  naturally  the  stronger  one.  The  plain  shank- 
steel  offers  the  advantage  that  there  is  no  shank  to  form,  other 
than  grinding  and  tempering  one  end  of  the  bar.  If  it  were 
not  for  the  form  of  steel  retainer  required,  perhaps  the  col- 
lared shank  would  give  better  results  than  the  Leyner  shank, 
as  the  ring  is  the  first  stage  of  the  forging  when  making  the 
lug.  The  collared  shank-steel  could  be  made  to  be  used  with 
both  anvil-block  and  tappetless  machines. 

So  far,  1-inch  round  steel  has  proved  satisfactory  with  all 
but  the  “wiggletails/ 


152  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Shank  breakage  at  either  end  of  the  lug  is  the  difficulty  en- 
countered with  the  stopers.  The  breakage  with  some  of  the 
hand-rotated  machines  has  gone  as  high  as  20%,  but  with  the 
mechanically-rotated  stopers  has  not  exceeded  3%.  Though 
% hexagon  and  1-in.  cruciform  steel  have  been  used  success- 
fully in  the  stoper-drills  for  years,  this  drill-steel  has  had  only 
plain  shanks.  The  weakness  in  the  1-inch  round  steel  seems 
to  develop  when  upsetting  the  bar  to  form  the  lugs  of  the 
Leyner  shank. 

Careful  Heat  Treatment 

It  is  thought  that  this  difficulty  can  be  overcome  by  more 
careful  heat  treatment  in  the  shop ; not  that  the  1-inch  steel  is 
being  treated  more  carelessly  than  the  114-in.  Leyner  steel, 
but  that  the  lighter  steel  should  be  given  more  special  atten- 
tion to  make  it  stand  the  strain.  The  shank  breakage  in  the 
regular  run  of  drill-steel  does  not  go  above  0.7%. 

The  actual  practice  in  the  Copper  Queen  shop  is  to  temper 
only  the  striking  end  of  the  shank.  Some  of  the  entire  shanks 
of  the  experimental  steel  have  been  tempered  in  fish  oil,  and 
these  have  given  better  results.  The  breakage  increases  with 
the  continued  use  of  the  drill-steel. 

In  much  of  the  1-inch  drill-steel  the  hole  through  the  bar  is 
distorted  in  regard  to  both  shape  and  position.  Not  in  all 
cases  is  the  distortion  due  to  forging  in  the  sharpening  shop, 
as  an  examination  of  many  bars  has  shown  this  condition  not 
limited  to  the  shank.  Any  alteration  from  the  round  hole 
means  an  unnecessary  weakness.  The  position  and  shape  of 
the  hole  in  hollow  drill-steel  is  an  important  matter  worthy  of 
careful  consideration. 

Another  weakness  in  the  use  of  lug-shanked  steel  for  stopers 
is  that  the  Leyner  form  of  chuck  does  not  offer  as  much  sup- 
port to  the  drill-steel  as  does  the  plain  shank-chuck. 

Throughout  these  tests,  an  air  pressure  of  about  85  lb.  per 
sq.  in.  was  delivered  to  the  stopers.  If  the  air  pressure  had 
been  reduced  5 or  10  lb.,  the  shank  breakage  would  not  have 
been  as  high. 

Drilling  Speed 

When  using  the  1-inch  steel  in  the  large  drifting  machines 
there  did  not  appear  to  be  any  material  increase  in  drilling 


i 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  DRILLING  MACHINES  AND  STEEL  153 


speed  above  the  results  obtained  with  the  l^-in.  steel.  The 
bit  on  the  1-inch  round  steel  is  1 14-in.  less  in  diameter  than 
the  corresponding  bit  in  the  1%-in.  steel.  In  some  cases,  the 
114-in.  steel  out-drills  the  smaller  steel.  From  these  results, 
it  looks  as  if  the  large  drifting  machines  were  too  powerful  for 
the  1-inch  experimental  steel.  Undoubtedly  the  same  inches 
cut  per  minute  could  be  obtained  with  a smaller  rock-drill  and 
1-inch  steel.  If  it  is  reduced,  and  though  the  first  cost  would 
be  higher,  the  upkeep  expense  would  be  reduced.  Most  manu- 
facturers make  their  rock-drills  to  run  most  efficiently  at  70 
lb.  of  air. 

An  outline  of  the  progress  followed  in  making  the  Leyner 
shank  is  as  follows: 

(1)  Heat  to  about  1800°  F. 

(2)  Countersink  hole  in  head  of  drill  and  forge. 

(3)  Re-heat  to  1800°  F.  and  upset  for  ring. 

(4)  Re-heat  to  1800°  F. 

(5)  Punch,  drive  in  pin,  and  form  lug  complete. 

(6)  Let  cool  in  air  on  shop  floor. 

(7)  Heat  shank  for  V/2  inches  from  striking  end  to  1400  to  1500°  F., 
and  draw  last  y2  inch  to  blue  color. 

To  form  the  collared  shank: 

(1)  Grind  striking  end  of  shank. 

(2)  Heat  to  1800°  F.,  put  on  collar  by  upsetting. 

(3)  Re-heat  to  1800°  F.,  countersink,  put  in  pin  and  forge  shank  to 
proper  size. 

(4)  Let  cool  on  shop  floor. 

(5)  Heat  shank  for  V/2  inches  from  striking  end  to  1400  to  1500°  F., 
and  draw  end  of  shank  to  blue  color. 

General  Conclusions 

From  the  foregoing  it  is  evident  that  great  economy  in  both 
the  manufacture  and  use  of  drilling  machines  can  be  obtained 
by  careful  study  of  the  fittings  used  in  the  routine  operation  of 
air-drills  and  the  adoption  of  standard  specifications  for  same. 

The  suggestions  made  are  not  offered  in  any  spirit  of  criti- 
cism, but  in  the  belief  that  joint  study  of  the  question  by  both 
drill  manufacturers  and  operators  cannot  fail  to  result  in 
mutual  benefits. 

With  this  in  mind,  I offer  the  further  suggestion  that  a joint 
committee  be  appointed  to  consider  the  question  and  submit 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


154 


recommendations  to  both  parties  for  the  adoption  of  standard 
specifications. 

Furthermore,  I do  not  consider  it  wise  to  attempt  to  stand- 
ardize the  types  of  drilling  machines  themselves  to  be  used  in 
mining  operations;  to  do  so  would  seriously  handicap  the 
efforts  of  the  designers  to  improve  them.  Their  past  record 
in  the  development  of  drilling  machines  is  sufficient  evidence 
of  the  value  of  unrestricted  competition  in  design. 

I am  in  favor  of  the  lightest  type  of  machine  in  the  various 
classes  of  work  that  will  stand  up  with  a reasonable  cost  of 
maintenance. 

In  the  matter  of  drill-steel,  I believe  that  material  econo- 
mies will  result  from  the  adoption  by  individual  operators  of 
one  section  of  steel  and  one  form  of  shank  for  all  types  of 
machines  used  by  them,  with  due  regard  for  the  particular 
conditions  encountered  in  their  work. 


STANDARDIZATION  AND  MANAGEMENT 


155 


RELATION  OF  STANDARDIZATION  TO  MINE  MANAGEMENT 

By  CHAS.  A.  MITKE,  Chairman  of  General  Committee  Standardization, 
Metal  Mines  Section,  American  Mining  Congress 

It  has  been  well  said  that  “great  economies  in  any  business 
of  production  result  from  careful  and  thoughtful  attention  to 
details,  and  mining  is  no  exception  to  this  rule.  On  the  con- 
trary, successful  mining  is  one  of  the  greatest  embodiments 
of  the  principle.  Just  as  the  difference  between  the  careful 
manager  and  the  careless  one  is  apt  to  be  the  difference  be- 
tween profit  and  loss,  so  the  difference  between  standardization 
and  non-standardization  is  very  frequently  the  difference  be- 
tween good  and  bad  management.” 

Labor  Is  50%  of  Costs  In  Mining 

Estimates  show  that  in  metal  mining  over  50%  of  the  total 
cost  of  production  is  chargeable  to  labor ; therefore,  the  proper 
directing  and  systematizing  of  the  activities  of  labor,  to  elimi- 
nate the  waste  of  human  efforts,  is  an  important  factor  in  the 
standardization  of  mining  operations. 

*~In  mines  where  only  a few  men  a?e  employed,  and  a small 
tonnage  produced,  the  entire  supervision  can  be  accurately 
directed  by  one  general  foreman,  and  the  question  of  standard- 
ization does  not  enter  largely  into  the  daily  work.  However, 
where  great  tonnages  must  be  produced  at  a low  cost,  and 
where  the  entire  supervision  of  all  details  by  one  man  is  utterly 
out  of  the  question,  but  of  necessity  rests  in  the  hands  of  a 
large  organization,  then  the  standardization  of  all  operations 
not  only  becomes  very  desirable  but  absolutely  essential. 

The  need  for  a scientific  investigation  of  mining  practices 
or  mining  methods,  with  a view  to  alleviating  present  condi- 
tions— as  regards  high  production  costs — which  have  been 
brought  about  largely  through  high  cost  of  supplies,  increased 
advances  in  wages,  and  loss  of  efficiency  due  to  the  employ- 
ment of  unskilled  or  raw  labor,  has  made  itself  felt  throughout 
the  entire  mining  industry,  not  only  in  the  United  States,  but 
also  in  Europe. 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


15(j 


Wage  Increase  and  Grade  of  Ore  Decrease 

In  one  large  center  in  this  country,  wages,  which  in  1914  ran 
from  $3.75  to  $4.25,  now  range  from  $4.65  to  $5.40  per  8-hour 
shift.  Taxes,  supplies,  freight  rates,  etc.,  are  also  considerably 
higher  than  they  were  several  years  ago,  with  no  immediate 
prospect  of  reduction.  Moreover,  inevitably,  the  grade  of  the 
ore  in  many  properties  will  decrease  as  time  passes.  This 
necessitates  the  mining  of  much  larger  tonnages  in  order  to 
maintain  the  ultimate  output  at  the  same  level. 

Therefore,  the  only  remaining  alternative  for  the  mine 
management  is  to  make  the  workers  so  efficient  as  to  warrant 
the  continuance  of  operations  under  existing  conditions.  This 

can  only  be  accomplished  in  the  following  manner : 

(1)  Americanization,  which  merely  begins  with  the 
teaching  of  the  English  language. 

(2)  Education  of  employes  (from  heads  of  departments 
right  through  the  entire  organization  down  to 
miners  and  shovelers)  in  the  most  efficient  method 
of  performing  the  daily  task. 

(3  By  establishing  a standard  program  for  all  opera- 
tions, in  order  that  human  efforts*  may  be  utilized  to 
the  greatest  advantage. 

(4)  By  furnishing  the  men  with  standard  equipment,  in 
order  to  facilitate  routine  work  and  make  their 
efforts  more  productive.  And 

(5)  In  order  to  encourage  the  miner  to  put  forth  his 
best  efforts  in  attaining  maximum  production,  an 
incentive,  over  and  above  day’s  pay,  should  be 
offered  by  the  management. 

Another  most  important  factor  in  developing  a scientific 
organization  is  the  “setting  of  standards  for  work  done.”  A 
very  vital  question  is,  what  constitutes  a day’s  work?  What 
was  assumed  to  be  a day’s  work  five  years  ago  cannot  be 
adopted  as  standard  today.  The  wage  system,  whether  con- 
tract or  bonus,  must  be  based  on  actual  knowledge  and  justice. 
Nothing  is  more  discouraging  to  a workman,  or  productive  of 
more  ill-feeling  and  discontent,  than  to  have  the  standard 
bonus  or  contract  rate  cut  because  he  has  performed  his  work 


STANDARDIZATION  AND  MANAGEMENT 


157 


exceptionally  well  and  made  a greater  footage  than  the  rating 
engineer  ever  anticipated  could  be  made  under  the  schedule. 
Cutting  the  bonus  after  it  is  once  established  is  responsible 
for  the  great  feeling  of  distrust  which  many  men  show  towards 
working  under  any  system  other  than  day’s  pay. 

Time  and  Skill  Needed  In  Standardizing  At  Mines 

In  order  to  achieve  a universal  success,  time  and  thought 
must  be  devoted  to  an  intensive  study  of  the  details  of  mining. 
Each  operation  must  be  divided  into  its  component  parts,  and 
standardization  applied  to  each  unit.  Experimentation  is  also 
a necessary  part  of  the  program,  and  should  be  encouraged 
and  fostered  by  the  management.  The  workers  must  be 
trained  to  perform  their  tasks  efficiently  and  intelligently. 
Labor-saving  devices  and  equipment  should  be  substituted  for 
hand  labor  wherever  possible.  Unskilled  labor  should  be  sup- 
planted as  far  as  possible  by  mechanical  means.  This  should 
not  be  interpreted  as  meaning  a loss  of  employment  to  many 
who  are  now  engaged  in  this  class  of  work.  There  is  plenty  of 
work  for  all,  and  the  performance  of  work  by  machinery,  re- 
quiring little  or  no  intelligence,  will  release  thousands  of  men 
who  can  be  trained  for  better  paying  jobs. 

Until  recently,  the  systematization  of  metal-mining  opera- 
tions was  considered  impracticable,  particularly  those  opera- 
tions carried  on  underground,  from  which  natural  circum- 
stances have,  to  a large  extent,  excluded  the  light  of  publicity. 
The  reserves  of  many  of  the  larger  mines  have  also  been  so 
rich  and  extensive  that  economy  has  not  played  as  important 
a part,  perhaps,  as  it  should.  The  ever-present  possibility  of 
“sweetening  the  ore,”  or,  in  other  words,  bringing  the  daily 
output  up  to  expectations  by  the  addition  of  higher  grade — 
kept  in  reserve  for  such  purpose — has  often  tided  over  situa- 
tions which,  otherwise,  might  possibly  have  disclosed  unsys- 
tematized methods  and  careless  supervision  on  the  part  of 
underground  bosses,  to  whom  quantity  plus  quality  at  the 
moment  meant  everything,  regardless  of  the  disastrous  effect 
their  methods  might  have  upon  the  future  life  of  the  mine. 

What  Happens  Underground 

Moreover,  underground  operations  are  to  a large  extent 
shrouded  in  obscurity,  and  the  intimate  details  are  known  only 


158  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

to  a few,  whose  business  it  is  to  make  daily  visits  to  the  work- 
ing places.  The  larger  number  of  the  employes  are  frequently 
ignorant  men,  whose  main  interest  in  their  work  is  to  get  out 
the  number  of  cars  required  by  the  boss,  and  to  whom  ore  and 
waste  are  of  very  little  interest,  except  as  they  add  to  the 
required  tonnage. 

The  needs  of  the  manufacturing  industry,  and  the  keen  com- 
uetition  encountered,  have  developed  a host  of  experts,  and 
production  engineers,  who  have  delved  into  the  intricacies  of 
the  different  branches  and  brought  to  light  innumerable 
operations  which  lend  themselves  well  to  the  adoption  of  stand- 
ard methods. 

Unfortunately,  in  the  mining  industry,  no  sweeping  changes 
can  be  effected,  which,  in  the  course  of  a short  period  of  time, 
might  be  expected  to  revolutionize  the  industry  at  large,  and 
produce  the  same  gratifying  results  as  have  been  obtained  in 
industrial  plants.  This  fact,  in  itself,  has  acted  as  a deterrent 
in  the  systematization  of  mining  operations,  and  while,  in 
individual  cases,  alert,  wide-awake  operators  have  made  con- 
siderable progress  along  these  lines,  the  industry  as  a whole 
does  not  reflect  the  same  systematization  of  operations  that 
may  be  found  in  manufacturing  plants. 

Mining  Practice  Less  Studied  Than  Metallurgy 

It  is  generally  conceded  that  mining  is  a profession  that 
should  require  a highly  specialized  training,  but  as  a rule  suf- 
ficient emphasis  is  not  placed  upon  the  practical  application  of 
such  technical  knowledge.  Too  much  dependency  is  placed 
upon  practical  experience  alone,  and  too  little  on  scientific  prin- 
ciples. Far  be  it  from  the  writer  to  discredit  practical  knowl- 
edge. The  mining  industry  in  the  past  owes  much  to  its 
practical  men,  but  what  it  now  requires  is  practical  knowledge 
superimposed  on  a scientific  basis,  or,  in  other  words,  the  at- 
tention of  men  who  have  added  years  of  practical  experience 
to  their  specialized  or  scientific  training. 

The  metallurgical  branch  of  the  profession  has  been  the 
subject  of  much  thought  and  study,  and  considerable  research 
is  continually  being  carried  on  in  this  branch  of  the  profession. 
Contributions  have  also  been  made  to  the  mining  branch,  but 
in  the  main  thes^  have  consisted  rather  of  descriptions  of  prac- 


STANDARDIZATION  AND  MANAGEMENT 


159 


tices  already  in  use  in  certain  localities,  than  in  the  nature  of 
original  research  work. 

An  X-ray  analysis  of  mining  operations  as  a whole,  fre- 
quently discloses  out-of-date  methods  which  would  not  for  an 
instant  be  tolerated  in  surface  plants.  What  large  factory 
owner,  for  instance,  would  permit  one  of  his  operators  to  spend 
two-thirds  of  his  day  away  from  his  machine,  hunting  parts, 
supplies,  lubricating  oils,  etc.?  There,  the  output  is  based  on 
machine  production  for  each  man,  and  the  amount  he  can  turn 
out  is  calculated  to  a nicety,  and  it  is  the  imperative  duty  of 
the  shop  foreman  to  see  that  everything  required  is  present 
and  the  machine  in  good  order  before  the  man  starts  to  work. 

Comparison  of  Work  of  Miners  and  Factory  Workers 

It  is,  however,  a common  occurrence  underground  for  a first- 
class  machine-drill  operator  to  spend  a large  portion  of  his 
time  walking  through  drifts  and  tunnels  in  search  of  sharp 
steel,  or  the  right  kind  of  steel  to  fit  his  machine,  repair  parts, 
oil-cans,  or  returning  defective  machines  to  the  tool-house  and 
carrying  new  ones  to  take  their  place. 

In  the  factory,  fatigue  studies  have  been  made,  covering 
every  action  from  the  steps  taken  in  performing  certain  duties, 
to  the  movements  made  by  each  hand  of  the  individual  worker 
in  handling  manufactured  parts.  In  mining,  however,  it  has 
come  to  be  an  unwritten  law  that  so  long  as  the  machine-man 
drills  a round  of  holes — special  allowance  being  made  for  un- 
usually hard  ground — he  has  performed  his  daily  task,  regard- 
less of  the  fact  that — like  Taylor’s  handler  of  pig-iron — 
providing  his  operations  are  studied  and  systematized,  he 
might  be  made  to  double  his  performance  with  comparatively 
little  additional  effort  to  himself.  This  has  been  demonstrated 
in  a number  of  instances ; yet,  as  a whole,  it  still  continues  to 
be  the  general  practice  to  consider  one  round  of  holes  a day’s 
work.  The  responsibility  for  this  lies  largely  with  the  mine 
management.  Formerly,  in  a great  many  instances,  atmos- 
pheric conditions  of  working  places  were  such  that  men  could 
not  work  consistently  during  an  8-hour  shift;  and  in  many 
cases  it  grew  to  be  the  practice  for  men  to  work  a certain 
period  and  then  seek  a better  atmosphere  in  the  mine,  where 
they  cooled  off  and  rested  for  an  equal  period  of  time.  Also, 


160  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

in  years  past,  the  ventilation  of  mines  was  so  bad  that  no 
blasting  could  be  allowed  during  the  shift,  and  consequently 
after  the  miner  drilled  his  round  of  holes  he  would  merely 
while  away  the  remainder  of  the  shift  until  quitting  time,  and 
fire  the  shots  when  leaving  the  mine.  With  the  improvement 
that  has  already  been  made  in  metal-mine  ventilation,  it  has 
been  proved  in  exceptionally  well-ventilated  mines  that  shots 
can  be  fired  at  any  time  during  the  shift  without  inconven- 
iencing the  men.  As  a matter  of  fact,  in  one  large  mine,  which 
is  well  ventilated,  there  is  a shot  fired  every  minute  during  the 
shift,  with  little  or  no  resulting  delay  to  the  underground 
force.  Now  that  every  effort  is  being  made  to  attain  under- 
ground working  atmospheres  as  nearly  as  possible  approxi7 
mating  those  on  surface,  this  custom  of  considering  one  round 
of  holes  a shift’s  work — regardless  of  its  depth — which  is 
really  nothing  more  than  habit,  must  be  overcome  if  mining 
operations  are  to  be  placed  on  an  equal  footing  with  those  on 
surface. 

Other  Departments  at  Mines  Capable  of  Improvement 

This  is  but  one  example  of  the  lack  of  systematization  in 
mining  operations.  Much  benefit  could  also  be  obtained  from 
careful  study  of  explosives,  their  use  and  handling ; the  correct 
placing  of  machine-drill  holes ; handling  of  timber,  both  under- 
ground and  on  surface,  where  much  unnecessary  labor  is  in- 
volved in  handling  and  re-handling  each  piece  as  it  comes  from 
the  cars,  the  writer  having  observed  as  many  as  12  men  em- 
ployed at  the  same  time  in  handling  one  stick  of  timber. 

The  distribution  and  care  of  underground  supplies  is  an- 
other subject  which  would  react  most  favorably  to  research. 

The  standardization  of  equipment  and  supplies  is  closely 
linked  with  the  systematization  of  operations,  and  of  necessity 
the  one  must  be  studied  along  with  the  other. 

Too  Many  Different  Drills 

The  industry  at  the  present  time  is  burdened  with  a multi- 
plicity of  machine-drills  of  varying  types,  sizes  and  weights, 
the  difference  in  weight  in  some  instances  not  being  more  than 
1 to  2 lb.  The  production  of  these  machines  follows  each 
other  with  such  rapidity  that  in  an  effort  to  stock  up  with 
the  best  equipment  available  on  the  market  many  machines  in 


STANDARDIZATION  AND  MANAGEMENT 


161 


good  condition  must  be  scrapped,  and  as  parts  are  not  inter- 
changeable, a considerable  investment  in  such  supplies  must 
continually  be  charged  off  to  profit  and  loss.  The  develop- 
ment of  these  machines  is,  of  course,  carried  on  by  the  manu- 
facturer to  meet  the  needs  of  the  industry ; but,  unfortunately, 
these  needs  are  often  the  individual  ideas  of  various  opera- 
tors rather  than  the  combined  views  of  the  majority.  What 
may  appeal  to  one  does  not  appeal  to  the  other,  and  conse- 
quently the  necessity  for  purchasing  and  trying  out  this  vari- 
ety of  types  becomes  an  ever-increasing  burden  on  the  opera- 
tor. 

During  the  past  seven  years  the  necessity  for  a drifting 
machine,  permitting  the  use  of  water  and  air  through  ma- 
chine and  steel,  became  so  evident  to  practically  every  pur- 
chaser of  rock-drills  that,  as  a result,  the  manufacturers 
evolved  the  water-Leyner.  The  self-rotating  water-stoper, 
which  is  now  nearing  perfection,  is  also  the  result  of  the  com- 
bined needs  of  the  mining  industry.  Many  other  improve- 
ments in  drilling  machines  are  possible,,  providing  some  re- 
search work  is  devoted  to  the  subject  of  finding  out  just  what 
specifications  would  meet  the  needs  of  the  majority  for  the 
different  types  of  machines,  such  as  jackhamers,  drifters,  and 
stopers. 

The  chucks  on  all  machines  must  become  standard,  so  as  to 
permit  the  inter-change  of  different  makes  of  steel.  The  lack 
in  efficiency  and  the  loss  of  time  incurred  at  present  through 
miners  supplying  themselves  with  steel  which  does  not  fit  the 
machine  they  are  using  at  the  time,  is  such  that  this  change  has 
become  an  absolute  necessity. 

Sizes  of  Drill-Steel 

The  size  and  types  of  steel  should  also  receive  attention. 
There  are  individual  cases,  where  companies  have  standard- 
ized on  the  14  hollow  octagon  for  all  stoping  and  raising,  and 
find  this  type  of  steel  satisfactory  for  all  their  needs.  Other 
companies  are  achieving  excellent  results  with  the  1-inch  hol- 
low round.  Research  would  bring  to  light  many  facts  that 
might  tend  to  prove  that  one  of  the  other  of  these  two  was  the 
more  satisfactory.  The  same  is  true  of  hose  fittings,  and 
various  parts  and  supplies  for  machines. 


102  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Underground  power  shovels  to  supplant  manual  labor  in 
shoveling  should  receive  attention,  in  order  to  avoid  the  crea- 
tion of  the  multiplicity  of  slightly  varying  types,  similar  to 
that  at  present  existing  among  rock-drills.  It  is  inevitable 
that  mechanical  equipment  must  supersede  hand  labor  under- 
ground to  a large  extent,  if  we  are  to  overcome  the  scarcity 
of  labor,  both  skilled  and  unskilled,  and  increase  the  tonnage 
per  man  shift,  at  the  same  time  maintaining  the  normal  grade 
of  the  ore,  which  is  the  principal  means  of  combating  the 
present  high  cost  of  production.  Shoveling  is  one  of  the  most 
important  items  in  underground  operations. 

Underground  Transportation  and  Ventilation 

Care  and  attention  might  profitably  be  devoted  to  under- 
ground transportation,  the  grade  of  tracks,  weight  of  rail, 
etc.  Also,  the  possibility  of  standardizing  on  a few  sizes  and 
types  of  mine  cars,  rather  than  on  the  unusually  large  number 
now  on  the  market,  and  the  various  methods  of  haulage,  com- 
pressed air,  electric,  and  steam. 

The  ventilation  of  metal  mines  is  a subject  of  the  utmost 
importance.  Without  good  air  no  man  can  live,  much  less 
work,  and  upon  the  condition  of  the  working  place  depends 
very  largely  the  efficiency  of  the  worker.  Much  of  the  trouble 
resulting  from  bad  air  in  metal  mines  at  the  present  day  comes 
from  the  deficiency  of  ventilation  in  dead  ends  in  drifts  and 
stopes.  The  ventilation  of  such  working  places  can  greatly 
be  improved  by  resorting  to  systematized  methods  in  regard 
to  the  use  of  certain  types  of  small  blowers  and  ventilating 
pipe,  care  and  attention  being  devoted  to  the  manner  in  which 
these  are  located  and  operated.  The  prevention  of  dust  in 
mines  necessitating  frequent  blasting  during  the  shift  is  an- 
other means  of  raising  the  efficiency  of  the  miners.  In  the 
past,  bad  air,  rock  dust,  and  heated  atmospheres  were  looked 
upon  as  necessary  evils  which  could  not  be  overcome,  and  the 
man  who  could  not  put  up  with  a certain  amount  of  such  dis- 
comfort was  rather  contemptuously  referred  to  as  one  who 
“could  not  stand  the  gaff.”  Today,  such  conditions  are  un- 
necessary, and  the  adoption  and  use  of  standard  equipment 
and  standard  methods  will  provide  the  men  with  a working 
atmosphere  in  which  they  can  put  forth  their  best  efforts  with- 
out discomfort  to  themselves.  The  systematic  testing  of  mine 


STANDARDIZATION  AND  MANAGEMENT 


163 


air  and  the  adoption  of  a standard  atmosphere  is  one  of  the 
pressing  needs  of  the  industry. 

Fires  in  Mines 

Fire-fighting  equipment  and  systematized  rules  for  combat- 
ing outbreaks  in  the  mine  are  also  of  the  utmost  importance, 
as  the  profit  and  loss  accounts  of  many  companies  show  large 
sums  charged  off  to  disasters  of  this  kind,  which  might  pos- 
sibly have  been  averted  through  the  keeping  in  stock  of  a 
standard  line  of  fire-fighting  apparatus. 

There  are  many  other  subjects  in  the  mining  industry  to 
which  standardization  can  be  applied,  such  for  instance  as 
cost  accounting.  Frequent  discrepancies  in  the  manner  of 
keeping  costs  are  encountered,  even  in  properties  owned  by  the 
same  company.  For  instance,  one  mine  will  charge  off  the 
work  of  preparing  an  orebody  for  stoping  to  development  work 
or  to  a separate  fund  which  has  been  laid  aside  for  such  pur- 
pose. Their  production  costs  may  then  appear  quite  low,  for 
the  reason  that  this  large  sum  which  should  necessarily  be 
added  to  the  stoping  cost,  as  it  all  goes  against  the  ultimate 
profits,  is  omitted,  while  other  companies  include  develop- 
ment costs,  but  exclude  overhead  and  supervision,  and  so 
forth. 

Ore  Reserves  and  Taxation 

The  estimation  of  ore  reserves  is  another  matter  for  re- 
search; equitable  taxation,  and  many  other  items,  all  come 
under  the  head  of  subjects  to  which  standardization  might  be 
applied. 

An  objection  frequently  raised  against  standardization  is 
that  it  retards  progress,  and  that  having  once  decided  on  a 
standard,  there  is  no  possibility  of  change  and  old  standards 
must  be  adhered  to  even  though  newer  methods  have  been 
developed  which  have  outclassed  the  old.  In  this  connection 
it  may  be  well  to  quote  from  an  authority*  on  this  subject, 
who  well  describes  the  functions  of  a standard,  in  the  following 
words : 

“A  standard  is  simply  a carefully  thought-out  method  of  per- 
forming a function,  or  carefully  drawn  specifications  covering 
an  implement,  or  some  article  of  stores,  or  of  products.  The 


Morris  L.  Cooke.  Bull.  No.  5,  Carnegie  Foundation  Series. 


164  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

idea  of  perfection  is  not  involved  in  Standardization.  The 
standard  method  of  doing  anything  is  simply  the  best  method 
that  can  be  devised  at  the  time  the  standard  is  drawn.  * * * 
Improvements  in  standards  are  wanted  and  adopted  whenever 
and  wherever  they  are  found.  There  is  absolutely  nothing  in 
standardization  to  preclude  innovation.  But  to  protect  stand- 
ards from  changes  which  are  not  in  the  direction  of  improve- 
ments, certain  safeguards  are  erected.  These  safeguards 
protect  standards  from  change  for  the  sake  of  change.  All 
that  is  demanded  * * * is  that  a proposed  change  in  a 

standard  must  be  scrutinized  as  carefully  as  the  standard  was 
scrutinized  prior  to  its  adoption.  Standards  adopted  and  pro- 
tected in  this  way  produce  the  best  that  is  known  at  any  one 
time.  Standardization  practiced  in  this  way  is  a constant 
invitation  to  experimentation  and  improvement.” 

Standardization  of  Great  Importance  to  Mines 

The  standardization  of  mine  equipment  and  mine  opera- 
tions in  the  various  branches  are  of  vital  interest  to  the  mine 
manager  who  is  responsible  for  the  ultimate  cost  of  the  prod- 
uct. In  order  to  work  out  these  problems,  to  accumulate  the 
correct  data  upon  which  to  base  conclusions,  and  finally  to 
introduce  standard  methods,  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  the 
mine  manager  effect  this  change  through  the  medium  of  his 
organization,  composed  of  heads  of  departments,  foremen, 
bosses,  and  engineers.  Their  intelligent  co-operation  is  there- 
fore an  essential  part  of  the  program.  These  are  the  men 
who  represent  the  company,  or  mine  management,  and  inter- 
pret the  policies  and  desires  of  the  company  to  the  great  mass 
of  employes.  They  are  also  intimately  acquainted  and  asso- 
ciated with  the  multiplicity  of  operations  which,  combined, 
form  the  activities  of  the  mine.  If  their  interest  and  enthusi- 
asm is  directed  towards  a study  and  systematization  of  the 
details  which  form  the  various  groups  of  operations,  then 
through  the  standardization  of  many  small  tasks,  which  by 
themselves  may  not  appear  important,  under  the  careful  super- 
vision of  the  mine  management,  larger  economies  will  result, 
which,  in  turn,  will  ultimately  have  the  desired,effect  of  reduc- 
ing production  costs. 


STANDARDIZATION  BY  BUREAU  OF  MINES 


1(J5 


STANDARDIZATION  WORK  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
BUREAU  OF  MINES 


By  F.  G.  COTTRELL 

In  attempting  to  standardize  mine  equipment,  the  current 
best  practice  can  be  crystallized  into  the  form  of  a code  or  set 
of  rules  and  regulations;  but  in  any  such  attempt  there  are 
always  items  about  which  there  is  a lack  of  proper  information ; 
so  that  there  is  doubt  whether  such  items  should  be  crystal- 
lized into  a code  or  passed  over  with  as  little  attention  as 
possible.  There  are  frequently  matters  that  yield  to  labora- 
tory investigation,  facilities  for  which  are  rarely  available  to 
the  mine  operator.  These  rather  difficult  points  are  rarely 
comprehensive  enough  to  form  the  basis  for  a code  covering 
any  considerable  portion  of  a field,  and  yet  they  may  themselves 
form  a standard  of  good  practice.  This  can  be  illustrated  by 
the  Bureau  of  Mines’  permissible  explosives  or  the  miners’ 
cap-lamps,  or  possibly  the  Bureau’s  rules  for  installing  and 
using  electrical  equipment  in  bituminous  coal  mines. 

Besides  the  results  of  laboratory  work  and  special  investiga- 
tion, there  is  also  that  type  of  work  which  is  the  result  of  con- 
ferences of  men  of  prominent  standing  in  their  profession  and 
who  are  regarded  as  authorities  in  their  own  field,  and  who 
write  their  opinion  of  current  best  practice  in  the  form  of  rules 
and  regulations.  This  type  of  work  is  illustrated  by  the  ‘Rules 
and  Regulations  for  Metal  Mines,’  compiled  by  mining  engi- 
neers of  standing,  and  ‘Proposed  Regulations  for  the  Drilling 
of  Gas  and  Oil  Wells  through  Coal  Beds.’ 

Approval  System  As  Basis  for  Standards 

While  not  directed  toward  the  production  of  standards  for 
mining  equipment,  still  the  Bureau’s  approval  system  furnishes 
material  that  may  well  form  the  basis  of  standards  for  certain 
equipment.  It  is  frequently  the  case  that  in  the  commercial 
development  of  a really  good  idea,  the  early  productions  are 
foredoomed  to  failure  because  of  lack  of  information  and  a 
proper  ideal  in  designing  the  apparatus.  In  safety  matters 
this  is  of  particular  interest  to  the  Bureau  of  Mines.  In. the 
development  of  electric  machinery  for  use  in  gaseous  mines. 


1(>G  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

questions  arise  as  to  the  proper  protection  of  the  device  so  that 
sparks  may  not  ignite  gas,  if  perchance  the  apparatus  is  in  a 
gaseous  atmosphere.  Some  kinds  of  sparks  readily  ignite  gas, 
while  others  will  not.  Certain  kinds  of  protective  devices  will 
prevent  ignition  from  etxending  into  the  surrounding  space. 
If  the  apparatus  is  designed  in  a manner  ignoring  these  facts, 
the  business  can  develop  only  through  dangerous  and  disas- 
trous experience  and  loss  of  life.  After  an  investigation,  the 
Bureau  draws  a minimum  specification  for  such  devices,  and 
allows  those  companies  which  meet  this  minimum  specification 
to  mark  their  devices  as  approved  by  the  Bureau  of  Mines. 
This  minimum  specification  allows  ample  room  for  individual 
initiative  and  development  beyond  the  line  of  necessary  safety. 
This  work  forms  the  basis  of  standardization  for  such  devices 
in  order  that  they  shall  be  safe  in  gaseous  mines. 

With  these  illustrations  of  the  purpose  of  the  Bureau,  a 
catalogue  of  its  publications  along  these  lines  is  sufficient  to 
indicate  the  field  already  entered  by  the  Department.  For  this 
purpose  of  special  investigation,  the  Bureau  has  a large  lab- 
oratory at  Pittsburgh  and  the  facilities  afforded  by  eleven 
other  stations  in  various  parts  of  the  country. 

The  Bureau  attempts  to  crack  the  hard  nuts  in  the  several 
fields  of  safe  equipment  as  rapidly  as  its  funds  allow,  and  it  is 
hoped  that  the  future  will  afford  increased  facilities  for  work 
of  this  kind. 

Publications  Available 

A list  of  the  Bureau’s  publications  on  this  subject  follows: 

Schedule  1. — ‘Conditions  and  Requirements  Under  which 
Explosives  are  Tested.’ 

Schedule  2A. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Explosion-Proof  Electric  Motors  for  Mines.’ 

Schedule  6A. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Portable  Electric  Mine  Lamps.’ 

Schedule  7. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Miners’  Safety  Lamps.’ 

Schedule  12. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Single-Shot  Blasting  Units.’ 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  107 


Schedule  13. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Self-Contained  Mine-Rescue  Breathing  Apparatus/ 

Schedule  14. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Gas  Masks/ 

Schedule  15. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Storage-Battery  Locomotives  for  Use  in  Gaseous 
Mines/ 

Schedule  16. — ‘Procedure  for  Establishing  a List  of  Per- 
missible Multiple-Shot  Blasting  Machines/ 

Technical  Paper  22. — ‘Electrical  Symbols  for  Mine  Maps/ 

Technical  Paper  53. — ‘Proposed  Regulations  for  the  Drill- 
ing of  Gas  and  Oil  Wells  with  Comments  thereon/ 

Technical  Paper  79; — ‘Electric  Lights  for  Use  about  Oil 
and  Gas  Wells/ 

Technical  Paper  138. — ‘Suggested  Safety  Rules  for  Install- 
ing and  Using  Electrical  Equipment  in  Bituminous  Coal  Mines/ 

Technical  Paper  214. — ‘Motor  Gasoline  Properties,  Labora- 
tory Methods  of  Testing,  and  Practical  Specifications/ 

Bulletin  49. — ‘Smoke  Abatement  and  City  Smoke  Ordi- 
nances/ 

Bulletin  75. — ‘Rules  and  Regulations  for  Metal  Mines/ 

Bulletin  116. — ‘Methods  of  Sampling  Delivered  Coal/ 

‘Advanced  First-Aid  Instructions  for  Miners/ 

‘Rescue  and  Recovery  Operations  in  Mines  after  Fires  and 
Explosions/ 

The  last  two  are  pocket-books  issued  in  1917  and  1916,  re- 
spectively. 


1G8 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION 

By  P.  G.  AGNEW,  Secretary  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee 

During  or  since  the  war,  national  engineering  standardizing 
bodies  have  been  organized  in  Austria,  Belgium,  Canada, 
France,  Germany,  Holland,  Italy,  Sweden,  Switzerland,  and 
the  United  States,  and  one  is  in  process  of  formation  in  Japan. 
All  of  these  are  similar  in  form  of  organization  and  method  of 
operation  to  the  British  Engineering  Standards  Association, 
which,  organized  in  1902,  has  been  a most  significant  factor  in 
the  development  of  British  industry. 

Our  own  society  — the  American  Engineering  Standards 
Committee — was  started  in  October,  1918,  and  has  been  ac- 
tively at  work  for  about  a year.  At  first  it  consisted  of  repre- 
sentatives of  the  American  Institute  of  Electrical  Engineers, 
American  Institute  of  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Engineers, 
American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers,  American  Society  of 
Mechanical  Engineers,  and  American  Society  for  Testing 
Materials.  Upon  invitation,  three  Government  departments — 
War,  Navy,  and  Commerce — joined  in  the  movement,  and  ap- 
pointed representatives;  and  later,  provision  was  made  for 
representation  upon  the  main  Committee  of  other  bodies  of 
national  scope  interested  in  standardization.  At  the  time  the 
Committee  was  organized  there  were  more  than  100  American 
societies  actively  engaged  in  standardization  work;  but  there 
were  no  systematic,  unified  methods  of  co-operation,  and  there 
had  been  a widespread  recognition  of  the  need  of  some  central 
agency  for  the  purpose. 

The  functions  of  the  Committee  are:  to  unify  methods  of 
arriving  at  engineering  standards;  to  secure  co-operation  be- 
tween various  interested  organizations,  in  order  to  prevent 
duplication  of  work  and  promulgation  of  conflicting  standards ; 
to  act  as  an  authoritative  channel  of  co-operation  in  interna- 
tional engineering  standardization ; to  promote  in  foreign 
countries  the  knowledge  of  recognized  American  standards; 
to  collect  and  classify  data  on  standards ; and  to  act  as  a bureau 
of  information  regarding  standardization. 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  1(39 


Scope  of  the  Work 

The  scope  of  the  work  which  is  being  carried  out  under  the 
auspices  and  rules  of  procedure  of  the  Committee  is  very 
broad.  The  following  types  of  work  are  found  among  the 
standardization  projects  which  are  now  under  way: 

1.  Definitions  of  technical  terms  used  in  engineering 
work,  specifications,  and  contracts. 

2.  Specifications  for  materials. 

3.  Methods  of  tests,  especially  acceptance  tests  for  mate- 
rials and  apparatus. 

4.  Dimensional  standardization  to  secure  interchange- 
ability  of  supplies — for  example,  screws,  nuts,  and 
bolts. 

5 Dimensional  standardization  to  secure  the  inter-work- 
ing of  parts,  and  of  inter-related  apparatus,  made  or 
assembled  by  different  manufacturers,  such  as  shafts, 
pulleys,  etc. 

6.  Safety  codes,  to  secure  uniformity  in  requirements  for 
safety  in  apparatus  and  equipment,  and  in  industrial 
processes. 

7.  The  limitation  of  the  number  of  types,  sizes  and  grades 
of  manufactured  products — an  exceedingly  important 
and  far-reaching  subject. 

Specific  Examples 

It  may  be  well  to  mention  two  or  three  specific  projects : 

The  British  Engineering  Standards  Association  suggested 
Anglo-American  agreement  on  a standard  series  of  cross- 
sectional  shapes  for  structural  steel.  A committee  was  or- 
ganized on  which  are  representatives  of  organizations  inter- 
ested in  the  question.  Among  them  are  the  Association  of 
American  Steel  Manufacturers,  American  Society  of  Civil 
Engineers,  Society  of  Naval  Architects  and  Marine  Engineers, 
American  Bureau  of  Shipping,  U.  S.  Navy,  and  the  Railway 
Car  Manufacturers’  Association.  Considerable  progress  has 
been  made,  and  a representative  of  the  committee  was  abroad 
during  the  early  summer  to  confer  with  the  British. 


170  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Another  example  arises  also  from  an  international  proposal, 
this  time  from  Belgium,  that  there  be  international  standard- 
ization for  the  non-ferrous  metals.  They  outlined  in  detail 
what  they  thought  should  be  done  on  the  question  of  zinc — the 
methods  of  sampling  zinc  ore,  methods  of  analysis,  allowances 
for  moisture  content,  etc.  A committee  is  being  organized  for 
the  work  on  zinc,  under  the  leadership — technically  called 
sponsorship — of  the  American  Zinc  Institute  and  the  Ameri- 
can Society  for  Testing  Materials.  On  this  committee  all  the 
societies  that  are  concerned  in  the  subject  will  be  represented. 

Passenger  and  freight  elevators  for  buildings  are  built  to  a 
large  extent  to  special  order.  On  account  of  lack  of  recognized 
standards,  adequate  provision  is  not  made  in  the  architect’s 
plans,  and  steel  work  is  often  up  before  fundamental  decisions 
on  elevators  are  made,  and  more  or  less  confused  and  wasteful 
conditions  result.  At  the  joint  request  of  the  Elevator  Manu- 
facturers’ Association  and  the  American  Institute  of  Archi- 
tects, a conference  was  called.  There  were  14  interested  or- 
ganizations that  were  represented.  The  action  taken  was 
enthusiastic  and  unanimous  that  a standardization  of  ele- 
vators, based  on  fundamental  considerations,  should  be  under- 
taken. Arrangements  are  being  made  for  a thoroughly  rep- 
resentative sectional  committee  to  carry  out  the  detailed 
technical  work. 

Another  illustration,  which  is  typically  American,  is  the 
matter  of  safety  codes.  There  have  been  in  the  past  at  least 
100  organizations  formulating  safety-codes.  Nearly  all  of  the 
48  States  have  bodies  that  have  the  authority  to  promulgate 
safety-codes.  At  a conference  in  Washington  in  January, 
1920,  where  more  than  100  organizations  were  represented,  it 
was  unanimously  voted  that  a comprehensive  program  of 
safety-codes  should  be  undertaken,  and  that  it  should  be 
handled  under  the  auspices  and  rules  of  procedure  of  the 
American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  in  order  that 
there  be  proper  co-ordination,  elimination  of  overlap,  etc. 
Active  work  is  now  in  progress  on  about  30  such  codes.  State 
commissions,  which  are  the  bodies  responsible  for  the  legal 
adoption  and  enforcement  of  safety-codes,  associations  of  in- 
surance companies,  national  engineering  societies,  manufac- 
turers’ and  industrial  associations,  labor  and  civic  organiza- 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  171 


tions,  and  technical  bureaus  of  the  Federal  Government  are  all 
heartily  co-operating  in  the  work.  The  committees  respon- 
sible for  the  formulation  of  each  of  the  codes  are  made  up  of 
representatives  of  such  of  these  bodies  as  are  interested  in  the 
particular  code  in  question. 

Economic  and  Industrial  Significance 

If  standardization  is  carried  out  on  a sound  engineering 
basis : 

1.  It  enables  buyer  and  seller  to  speak  the  same  languager 
and  makes  it  possible  to  compel  competitive  sellers  to 
do  likewise. 

2.  In  thus  putting  tenders  on  an  easily  comparable  basis, 
it  promotes  fairness  in  competition,  both  in  domestic 
and  in  foreign  trade. 

3 It  lowers  unit-costs  to  the  public,  by  making  mass 
production  possible,  as  has  been  so  strikingly  shown 
in  the  unification  of  incandescent  lamps  and  auto- 
mobiles. 

4.  By  simplifying  the  carrying  of  stocks  it  makes  deliv- 
eries quicker  and  prices  lower. 

5.  It  decreases  litigation  and  other  factors  tending  to 
disorganize  industry,  the  burden  of  which  ultimately 
falls  upon  the  public. 

6.  It  eliminates  indecision  both  in  production  and  utiliza- 
tion— a prolific  cause  of  inefficiency  and  waste. 

7.  By  focusing  on  essentials,  it  decreases  selling  expense, 
one  of  the  serious  problems  of  our  economic  system. 

8.  By  concentrating  on  fewer  lines,  it  enables  more 
thought  and  energy  to  be  put  into  designs,  so  that  they 
will  be  more  efficient  and  economical. 

9.  It  stimulates  research,  to  which  it  is  closely  allied. 

10.  It  is  one  of  the  principal  means  of  getting  the  results 
of  research  and  development  into  actual  use  in  the 
industries. 

11.  It  helps  to  eliminate  practices  that  are  merely  the 
result  of  accidental  or  tradition,  which  impede  de- 
velopment. 


172  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

12.  By  concentration  on  essentials,  and  the  consequent 
suppression  of  confusing  elements  intended  merely  for 
sales  effect,  it  helps  to  base  competition  squarely  upon 
efficiency  in  production  and  distribution  and  upon  in- 
trinsic merit  of  product. 

A stock  argument  often  used  against  standardization  is  the 
claim  that  it  results  in  crystallization  and  the  throttling  of 
development.  Quite  the  contrary  is  true  if  the  work  is  carried 
out  on  a sound  basis.  Crystallization,  when  it  occurs,  results 
from  mental  attitude,  and  not  from  sound  engineering  stand- 
ardization. As  just  stated,  standardization  in  itself  is  a pow- 
erful incentive  to  research,  and  is  one  of  the  chief  means  of 
getting  the  results  of  research  actually  utilized.  In  attempting 
to  arrive  at  standards  agreement  is  frequently  prevented  by  a 
lack  of  facts,  and  this  leads  to  the  getting  of  those  facts. 

Benefits  of  Research 

Dr.  W.  R.  Whitney,  the  director  of  one  of  our  great  indus- 
trial research  laboratories,  has  said  that  the  benefits  of  re- 
search and  development  work  to  the  public  are  far  greater 
than  to  the  manufacturer;  that  while  a series  of  investiga- 
tions may  benefit  the  manufacturer  to  the  extent  of  millions, 
the  ultimate  benefit  to  the  public  will  be  in  hundreds  of  mil- 
lions. A striking  example  that  Dr.  Whitney  had  in  mind  was 
the  incandescent  electric  lamp.  It  is  doubtful  if  there  is 
another  article  in  any  of  our  industries  that  represents  more 
research  work  either  in  quantity  or  in  quality.  The  benefits 
that  have  accrued  to  the  manufacturer  and  to  the  -public  could 
not  have  been  realised  had  the  research  work  not  been  supple- 
mented by  thorough-going  standardization. 

Organization  and  Methods 

The  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee  itself, 
usually  referred  to  as  the  Main  Committee,  is  composed  at 
present  of  47  members,  representing  17  member-bodies,  which 
are  as  follows : 

American  Electric  Railway  Association. 

American  Institute  of  Electrical  Engineers. 

American  Institute  of  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Engi- 


neers. 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  173 


American  Society  of  Civil  Engineers. 

American  Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers. 

American  Society  for  Testing  Materials. 

Electrical  Manufacturers’  Council — 

Associated  Manufacturers  of  Electrical  Supplies, 
Electric  Power  Club, 

Electrical  Manufacturers’  Club. 

Fire  Protection  Group — 

Asociated  Factory  Mutual  Fire  Insurance  Companies, 
National  Board  of  Fire  Underwriters, 

National  Fire  Protection  Association, 

Underwriters’  Laboratories. 

Gas  Group — 

American  Gas  Association, 

Compressed  Gas  Manufacturers’  Association, 
International  Acetylene  Association. 

National  Electric  Light  Association. 

National  Safety  Council. 

Society  of  Automotive  Engineers. 

U.  S.  Department  of  Agriculture. 

U.  S.  Department  of  Commerce. 

U.  S.  Department  of  the  Interior. 

U.  S.  Navy  Department. 

U.  S.  War  Department. 

The  Committee  does  not  duplicate  the  work  of  other  organi- 
zations. On  the  contrary,  in  acting  as  a clearing-house  for 
standardization,  it  eliminates  duplication,  as  very  substantial 
results  have  already  shown. 

The  Main  Committee  is  solely  an  administrative  and  policy- 
forming body,  and  does  not  pass  upon  the  technical  details  of 
standards.  The  formulation  of  a standard  is  in  the  hands  of 
a working  committee,  technically  called  a “sectional  com- 
mittee,” made  up  of  representatives  designated  by  the  various 
bodies  interested.  The  Main  Committee  must  approve  the  per- 
sonnel of  each  sectional  committee,  as  being  authoritative  and 
adequately  representative  of  the  various  interests  concerned. 
Producers,  consumers,  and  general  interests,  are  to  be  repre- 
sented on  every  sectional  committee  dealing  with  standards  of 
a commercial  character. 


174  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Sponsor  Bodies 

In  one  important  particular  the  method  of  work  of  the 
American  Engineering  Standards  Committee  differs  from  that 
of  the  other  national  bodies.  This  is  the  use  of  what  are 
termed  “sponsor”  bodies.  When  the  Committee  was  formed 
there  were  already  a large  number  of  organizations  doing 
standardization  work,  some  of  whom  had  accomplished,  and 
were  engaged  in,  very  important  work.  This  led  to  a policy  of 
decentralization.  Each  sectional  committee  is  organized  by, 
and  under  the  leadership  of,  one  or  more  of  the  principal  bodies 
interested  and  known  as  sponsor. 

Special  provision  is  made  for  the  approval  of  important 
standards  in  existence  prior  to  1920,  without  going  through 
the  full  formal  machinery  of  a sectional  committee. 

It  is  to  be  noted  that  each  industry,  or  branch  of  industry, 
is  wholly  autonomous  in  its  standardization  work,  the  Main 
Committee  not  dealing  with  the  technical  matters  in  any  way, 
but  merely  assuring  that  each  body  or  group  concerned  in  a 
standard  shall  have  the  opportunity  to  participate  in  its  for- 
mulation, and  providing  systematic  means  of  co-operation  in 
the  work. 

The  Committee  has  decided  that  “if  it  is  the  desire  of  any 
industry  to  have  a general  committee,  representative  of  the 
industry  as  a whole,  as  a means  of  developing  and  correlating 
the  standardization  work  of  the  industry,  the  arrangement 
will  be  eminently  satisfactory  to  the  American  Engineering 
Standards  Committee.”  Such  a general  correlating  committee 
for  mining  standardization  has  been  formed,  the  nucleus  being 
two  representatives  from  each  of  five  leading  mining  bodies — 
the  American  Mining  Congress,  the  American  Institute  of 
Mining  and  Metallurgical  Engineers,  the  U.  S.  Bureau  of 
Mines,  the  Mining  and  Metallurgical  Society  of  America,  and 
the  National  Safety  Council. 

If  requested  to  do  so  by  a responsible  organization,  the  Main 
Committee  calls  a conference  of  the  interested  bodies  to  decide 
whether  it  is  desirable  that  a given  piece  of  standardization 
work  shall  be  undertaken,  and  if  so,  what  its  scope  shall  be. 
In  this,  and  in  its  work  generally,  the  Committee  is  not  an 
initiating  body.  Consideration  will  show  that  this  policy  is 


NATIONAL  AND  INTERNATIONAL  STANDARDIZATION  175 


very  conducive,  if  not  necessary,  to  cordial  co-operative  work. 
For  example,  if  the  Committee  were  to  call  such  a conference 
on  its  own  initiative,  its  action  in  doing  so  might  be  misunder- 
stood and  resented  as  an  attempt  to  dominate,  while  by  not 
taking  the  initiative  it  becomes  perfectly  clear  that  the  pur- 
pose is  to  serve. 

Machinery  for  International  Standardization 

The  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee  is  in 
touch  with  all  the  other  national  standardizing  bodies,  and  is 
actively  co-operating  with  several  of  them. 

There  are  at  present  three  international  standardizing 
bodies — the  International  Electrotechnical  Commission,  the 
International  Commission  on  Illumination,  and  the  Interna- 
tional Aircraft  Standards  Commission.  Each  of  these  com- 
missions is  composed  of  national  committees  in  the  different 
countries.  The  International  Aircraft  Standards  Commission 
has  a quasi-governmental  status. 

In  the  other  fields  there  is  as  yet  no  machinery  for  general 
international  standardization.  Each  national  body  deals  di- 
rectly and  independently  with  any  of  the  other  national  bodies 
with  which  it  wishes  to  co-operate  on  any  specific  project. 
Plans  are  now  being  made  in  Europe  for  a conference  in  the 
spring  of  1921  to  further  international  standardization,  and  to 
take  first  steps  toward  systematizing  methods  of  co-operation 
between  the  different  national  bodies. 

European  Activity 

Early  in  1920  I had  the  opportunity  of  visiting  the  national 
standardizing  bodies  of  Belgium,  France,  Great  Britain,  and 
Holland.  It  is  surprising  to  see  the  amount  and  the  intensity 
of  standardization  work  being  undertaken  in  Europe.  One  con- 
tinually heard  the  term  “mass  production,”  and  the  statement 
that  the  extensive  introduction  of  it  into  industry  through 
standardization  is  an  economic  necessity  for  Europe  today. 
Dimensional  standardization  is  being  carried  much  further 
than  has  been  attempted  in  America,  and  standardization  on  a 
national  scale  is  being  woven  into  industrial  fabric  much  more 
intimately  than  it  is  here. 

These  conditions  prevail  to  an  extraordinary  extent  in  Ger- 
many, where  the  economic  pressure  is  so  great.  It  is  being 


176  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

carried  further  than  would  generally  be  thought  desirable  in 
America.  Considerable  work  is  being  done  in  the  standard- 
ization of  design,  and  in  some  cases  uniform  design  of  com- 
plete apparatus  is  proposed  for  the  entire  German  industry. 
It  is  urged  that  a great  increase  in  efficiency  and  economy  in 
production  and  utilization  will  result  from  pooling  experience 
and  skilled  in  design,  and  that  it  will  be  of  great  value  in 
foreign  trade,  for  example,  in  maintaining  service  stations. 

The  standardization  movement  is  one  of  co-operation 
throughout  each  branch  of  industry,  and  between  the  different 
branches  of  industry  whose  interests  touch  or  overlap,  and 
will  inevitably  lead  to  a large  measure  of  international  stand- 
ardization. 

For  years  there  has  been  a growing  feeling  among  leaders 
in  industry,  which  was  heightened  by  the  experiences  of  the 
war,  that  our  industries  function  too  much  as  independent 
units,  and  not  enough  as  articulated  parts  of  a national  whole. 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  standardization  offers  a major 
opportunity  toward  the  integration  of  our  industries  on  a 
national  scale,  so  that  they  may  function  in  a truly  national 
way. 


STANDARDIZATION  BY  BUREAU  OF  STANDARDS 


177 


STANDARDIZATION  AT  THE  UNITED  STATES  BUREAU 
OF  STANDARDS 

By  G.  K.  BURGESS 

The  Bureau  of  Standards  welcomes  the  opportunity  of  par- 
ticipating in  these  first  annual  conferences  of  the  American 
Mining  Congress  on  standardization,  and  the  director,  Dr. 
S.  W.  Stratton,  regrets  he  was  not  able  to  be  present  in  person 
to  take  part  in  the  discussions  and  present  a statement  of  the 
work  that  the  Bureau  is  doing  in  the  field  of  standardization. 

This  Bureau  was  founded  in  1901.  At  the  present  time  it 
has  a personnel  of  about  850,  and  is  located  in  a 200-acre 
tract  just  outside  of  the  city  of  Washington,  D.  C.  In  10 
permanent  and  several  temporary  structures  the  plant  repre- 
sents a capital  expenditure  of  $4,000,000.  The  budget  for 
1920  is  $1,200,000. 

How  the  Bureau  Works 

The  scientific  and  technical  work  of  the  Bureau  is  grouped 
in  nine  administrative  divisions,  which  are  arranged  accord- 
ing to  the  subject-matter  coming  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
Bureau.  These  divisions  are:  Weights  and  Measures,  Elec- 
tricity, Heat,  Optics,  Chemistry,  Engineering,  Physics,  Struc- 
tural and  Miscellaneous  Materials,  Metallurgy,  and  Ceramics. 
These  lines  of  work  were  not  all  developed  at  once,  but  the 
Bureau  has  had  a systematic  and  healthy  growth  directed 
largely  by  the  same  men  who  were  associated  with  Dr.  Strat- 
ton at  the  time  of  the  Bureau’s  foundation.  This  has  made 
for  continuity  of  policy,  and  a rational,  systematic,  develop- 
ment along  lines  laid  down  in  advance  and  carried  out  as 
opportunity  offered. 

At  the  time  of  the  establishment  of  the  Bureau,  it  was  nec- 
essary, in  the  hearings  before  the  Congressional  Committee, 
to  call  in  witnesses  from  many  fields  of  work  to  demonstrate 
the  advisability  or  even  the  desirability  of  the  establishment 
of  a Bureau  concerned  with  standards.  At  that  time  there 
was  no  National,  State,  or  Municipal  body  concerning  itself 
with  and  responsible  for  standards  of  measurement  on  any 
comprehensive  scale.  In  the  field  of  materials  there  was  the 


178  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

American  Society  for  Testing  Materials,  founded  in  1898, 
which,  from  the  start,  had  been  concerning  itself  with  the  pro- 
motion of  knowledge  of  the  materials  of  engineering  and  the 
standardization  of  specifications  and  the  methods  of  testing. 
The  membership  of  this  Society  at  the  time  of  the  foundation 
of  the  Bureau  of  Standards  was  lesss  than  200,  whereas  now, 
as  an  evidence  of  the  growth  of  the  standards  idea  in  the  field 
of  engineering  materials,  membership  of  the  American  Society 
for  Testing  Materials  is  some  2900  persons.  About  the  time 
of  the  establishment  of  the  Bureau,  the  large  engineering  soci- 
eties began  to  interest  themselves  with  the  various  aspects  of 
the  standardization  field.  This  interest  in  standards  cul- 
minated in  the  formation  of  the  American  Engineering  Stand- 
ards Committee  in  October,  1918,  which  after  a year  largely 
devoted  to  questions  concerned  with  scope,  organization,  and 
methods  of  functioning  is  now  well  launched  on  a firm  basis 
with  a very  rapidly  expanding  program.  A list  of  the  technical 
organizations  of  the  country  drawn  up  last  year  showed  there 
were  over  260  of  such  that  are  actively  interested  in  one  way 
or  another  in  the  subject  of  standards. 

Co-operation  Between  Government  Departments 

In  the  Government  Departments,  during  these  20  years, 
closer  relations  and  interchange  of  experience  in  the  formula- 
tion of  specifications  and  standards  has  been  developing,  al- 
though some  of  the  Departments  have  been  and  still  are 
handicapped  by  an  inadequately  equipped  personnel  for  han- 
dling such  questions  with  entire  satisfaction  to  themselves. 
The  question  may  be  asked,  “What  attitude  does  the  Bureau 
of  Standards  take  toward  other  organizations,  Governmental, 
and  especially  non-Govermental,  in  the  field  of  standardiza- 
tion ?”  This  may  perhaps  best  be  answered  by  considering  the 
relations  in  the  past  between  the  Bureau  of  Standards  and 
such  bodies.  Let  us  take  first  the  Government  Departments : 
In  the  hearings  preceding  the  establishment  of  the  Bureau, 
representatives  of  the  various  Departments  were  asked  to 
testify  as  to  what  help  such  a Bureau  would  be  to  their  Depart- 
ment. In  the  light  of  future  developments  this  testimony 
today  makes  very  interesting  reading.  Representatives  of 
one  of  the  largest  Departments  requiring  a great  deal  of  high- 
class  technical  work  testified  that  such  a Bureau  would  render 


STANDARDIZATION  BY  BUREAU  OF  STANDARDS 


179 


no  service  to  their  Department.  It  is  a matter  of  record, 
however,  that  this  particular  Department  has  called  for  the 
services  of  the  Bureau  more  than  has  any  other,  and  largely  for 
the  very  reason  that  it  has  so  many  highly  technical  questions 
involving  specifications,  standards,  and  properties  of  mate- 
rials and  performance  of  equipment,  that  in  the  very  nature  of 
things  it  was  inevitable  that  the  existence  of  such  an  organiza- 
tion as  the  Bureau  of  Standards  equipped  for  experimental 
work  on  fundamental  constants,  properties  of  material,  and 
methods  of  measurement,  would  have  to  be  used  by  such  a 
department. 

The  Bureau  has  acted  in  an  advisory  or  consulting  capacity 
to . many  of  the  Government  Departments  on  questions  in- 
volving specifications  and  standards,  and  has  carried  out  many 
investigations  at  the  instigation  of  these  Departments  on  mat- 
ters primarily  of  interest  to  them. 

Other  Standardization  Societies  Desirable 

We  may  state  it  as  an  axiom,  that  the  Bureau  of  Standards 
encourages  the  formation  and  growth  of  any  other  organiza- 
tion, whether  it  be  public  or  private,  which  has  among  its  ob- 
jects the  progress  or  improvement  in  the  standardization  field 
and  in  the  dissemination  of  knowledge  concerning  standards. 
The  standardization  field  is  one  of  practically  unlimited  extent, 
and  each  one  of  the  numerous  organizations  in  the  country 
that  are  concerned  with  the  subject  has  some  particular  phase 
of  it  that  it  wishes  to  cultivate.  In  so  far  as  its  facilities 
admit,  the  Bureau  of  Standards  is  ready  at  all  times  to  work 
in  harmony  with,  and  when  desired  in  co-operation  with,  all 
movements  looking  toward  the  improvement  of  standards  and 
the  methods  of  standardization.  There  are  few,  if  any, 
aspects  of  the  development  of  standards  and  specifications,  at 
least  concerning  matters  relating  in  whole  or  part  to  various 
branches  of  engineering,  in  which  the  Bureau  of  Standards  can 
not  be  of  some  use.  To  refer  again,  as  an  example,  to  the 
work  of  the  American  Society  for  Testing  Materials,  it  has 
been  mutually  advantageous  to  the  Society  and  to  the  Bureau 
to  work  in  close  harmony  in  the  preparation  of  specifications 
for  engineering  materials.  A great  deal  of  the  experimental 
work  outlined  by  the  several  committees  of  this  Society  has 
been  carried  out  in  the  Bureau  laboratories,  and  members  of 


180  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

the  Bureau  are  represented  on  many  of  the  Society’s  com- 
mittees. We  believe,  and  in  this  I can  speak  both  for  the 
Bureau  of  Standards  and  the  American  Society  for  Testing 
Materials,  that  this  close  co-operation  and  co-ordination  of 
effort  has  worked  to  the  very  great  benefit  of  the  engineering 
public. 

Again,  the  Bureau  of  Standards  welcomed  the  founding  of 
the  American  Engineering  Standards  Committee,  on  which 
Committee  the  Bureau  has  three  representatives.  It  will  be 
remembered  that  in  the  preparation  of  standards  which  are 
to  be  reported  to  the  Standards  Committee  there  is  a “sec- 
tional committee”  appointed  to  formulate  a given  standard, 
and  there  is  one  or  more  especially  interested  organizations 
named  “sponsor”  to  push  actively  the  constructive  work  on 
the  standard.  The  Bureau  of  Standards  has  been  designated 
as  sponsor  in  the  preparation  of  a considerable  number  of 
standards,  including,  for  example,  several  in  connection  with 
the  preparation  of  industrial  safety-codes  as  follows:  Elec- 
trical Safety  Code,  Gas  Safety  Code,  Head  and  Eye  Protection, 
Lightning  Protection,  Logging  and  Saw-Mill  Machinery, 
among  a list  of  37  codes  which  are  in  various  stages  of  com- 
pletion. 

A Wide  Field  in  Standardization 

The  Bureau  of  Standards  recognizes  that  the  field  of  stand- 
ardization is  an  extensive  one ; and  the  functions  of  the  Bureau 
may  be  briefly  stated  as  the  development,  construction,  cus- 
tody, and  maintenance  of  reference  and  working  standard  and 
their  inter-comparison,  improvement,  and  application,  in 
science,  engineering,  industry  and  commerce.  For  convenience, 
the  Bureau  groups  standards  into  five  classes : (1)  “Standards 
of  Measurement,”  which  includes  reference  and  working  stand- 
ards for  measurements  of  all  kinds  for  expressing  the  quan- 
titative aspects  of  space,  time,  matter,  energy,  motion,  and 
their  inter-relations  as  illustrated  by  length,  area,  volume, 
mass,  density,  pressure,  thermal,  electrical,  and  other  physical 
measurements,  which  have  for  their  purpose  to  aid  accuracy  in 
industry,  assist  commerce  in  size*  standards,  promote  justice 
in  daily  trade,  and  facilitate  precision  in  science  and  tech- 
nologic research.  (2)  “Standard  Constants.”  or  what  we 
may  call  natural  constant  or  the  measured  numerical  data  rep- 


STANDARDIZATION  P»Y  BUREAU  OF  STANDARDS 


181 


resented  by  fixed  physical  constants,  such  as  mechanical 
equivalent  of  heat,  melting  and  boiling  points,  heats  of  com- 
bustion, electro-chemical,  and  atomic  weights,  and  the  like, 
which  we  have  as  an  exact  basis  for  study,  experiment,  com- 
putation, and  design,  furnish  an  efficient  control  for  industrial 
processes  in  securing  reproducible  and  uniformly  high  qual- 
ity and  output,  to  secure  uniformity  of  practice  in  instruments 
and  tables  and  aid  laboratory  research  by  reducing  errors  and 
uncertainty  caused  by  the  use  of  data  of  doubtful  accuracy. 
(3)  “Standards  of  Quality,”  which  are  illustrated  by  specifi- 
cations for  materials  used  in  engineering,  which  fix  in  measur- 
able terms  a property  or  group  of  properties  for  determining 
the  quality  in  question,  securing  high  utility  in  the  products 
of  industry  by  stabilizing  the  standard  of  quality,  furnishing 
a scientific  basis  for  fair  dealing,  avoiding  disputes  or  provid- 
ing means  to  settle  questions,  promoting  truthful  branding 
and  advertising  as  well  as  precision  and  the  avoidance  of 
waste.  (4)  “Standards  of  Performance,”  or  specifications  of 
operative  efficiency  or  action  for  machines  and  devices.  (5) 
“Standards  of  Practice,”  such  as  codes  and  regulations  impar- 
tially analyzed  and  formulated  after  study  and  experiment  into 
standards  of  practice  for  technical  regulation  of  construction, 
installation,  operation,  and  based  upon  standards  of  measure- 
ment, quality  and  performance;  such,  for  example,  are  the 
safety  codes  above  mentioned. 

Specific  Examples  of  the  Bureau’s  Work 

To  give  a complete  account  of  the  standardization  work  of 
the  Bureau  would  surely  take  us  far  afield,  but  it  may  not  be 
without  interest  to  give  a summary  of  certain  of  the  standard- 
ization activities  as  illustrative  of  the  methods  of  procedure, 
and  emphasis  will  be  placed  on  those  cases  showing  our  meth- 
ods of  co-operation  with  other  bodies.  In  the  field  of  funda- 
mental standards  of  measurement  and  the  determination  of 
standard  constants  the  Bureau  considers  itself  the  final  author- 
ity for  the  country,  but  in  the  development  of  standards  of 
quality,  and  more  particularly  in  the  establishment  of  stand- 
ards of  practice,  the  Bureau  considers  it  does  its  most  effective 
work  in  co-operation  with  the  interested  bodies. 


182  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Screw-Threads 

Let  us  first  consider  briefly  the  work  of  the  National  Screw 
Thread  Commission  established  by  Congress  on  July  18,  1918, 
made  up  of  representatives  of  the  Government,  the  Society  of 
Mechanical  Engineers  and  the  Society  of  Automotive  Engi- 
neers and.  of  which  the  Director  of  the  Bureau  of  Standards 
is  chairman.  The  task  of  this  Commission  is  the  establishment 
of  screw-thread  standardization  from  the  standpoint  of  inter- 
changeable manufacture,  and  includes  the  setting  up  of  a 
series  or  system  of  threads  with  definite  specifications  as  to 
form  and  dimensions  expressed  in  measurable  terms.  The 
Commission  has  decided  that  the  thread  form  should  be  that 
known  as  the  “U.  S.  form” — there  should  be  two  series  of 
threads,  a coarse  and  a fine,  and  there  should  be  four  classes 
of  fit  provided  for,  loose,  medium  or  standard,  close,  and 
wrench  fit.  There  have  been  established  a set  of  pitches  and 
tolerances  for  each  class,  and  the  Commission  still  has  to  for- 
mulate a considerable  number  of  rules  regarding  threads, 
tubes,  taps,  bar  stock,  and  dimensions  of  bolt  heads  and  nuts. 
The  experimental  work  for  the  Commission  has  been  carried 
out  largely  at  the  Bureau  of  Standards. 

Research  in  Electrolysis 

As  an  example  of  the  co-operative  method  adopted  by  the 
Bureau  in  questions  involving  engineering  practice  on  a con- 
siderable scale  in  various  communities,  there  may  be  men- 
tioned that  of  electrolysis  survey  and  prevention.  This  is  a 
problem  that  has  been  studied  more  particularly  in  its  relation 
to  conditions  in  cities  and  in  some  cases  to  inter-urban  trans- 
mission, but  nevertheless  may  have  its  applications  in  certain 
cases  to  the  mining  industry.  The  method  of  carrying  out 
these  investigations  is,  however,  typical  of  the  way  the  Bureau 
would  take  up  problems  falling  in  its  field  which  might  be 
desired  by  the  mining  industry.  Briefly,  our  methods  in  elec- 
trolysis investigations  have  been  the  following : Field  surveys 
are  carried  out  on  the  actual  conditions  in  the  districts  to  be 
studied.  This  often  requires,  for  example,  modified  forms  of 
apparatus  for  measuring  current  flow  in  pipes  and  leakage 
flow  from  pipes.  In  fact,  the  electrolysis  problem  has  required 
the  development  of  a whole  series  of  modified  apparatus  for 


STANDARDIZATION  BY  BUREAU  OF  STANDARDS 


183 


the  purpose.  There  arise  special  problems  such,  for  example, 
as  the  actual  facts  concerning  the  phenomena  of  corrosion  of 
lead,  and  as  what  may  be  expected  under  the  conditions  of 
alternating  current  and  of  direct  current.  This  requires  lab- 
oratory as  well  as  field  research.  From  its  surveys  and  experi- 
mental studies,  the  Bureau  has  been  able  in  many  cases  to 
recommend  modifications  that  have  eliminated  or  greatly  re- 
duced the  very  harmful  effects  of  electrolysis  in  cities.  A not 
unimportant  function  of  the  Bureau  has  been  its  position  of 
an  impartial  technical  advisor  as  between  the  diverse  interests. 

There  is  also  in  existence  an  American  Committee  on  Elec- 
trolysis, which  represents  all  of  the  great  national  associations 
of  utilities  companies,  and  is  co-operating  with  the  Bureau  in 
conducting  extensive  research  in  the  field  of  electrolysis  miti- 
gation. The  research  program  was  formulated  by  the  Bureau 
and  approved  by  the  Committee,  and  this  research  work  will 
be  carried  out  jointly.  Some  of  the  work  under  way  is  the 
effect  of  pipe  drainage  on  underground  systems,  especial  atten- 
tion being  given  to  the  possibility  of  joint  electrolysis  on  high 
resistance  joints  and  interchange  of  current  between  drained 
systems.  It  will  be  seen  from  this  brief  statement  that  several 
aspects  of  this  electrolysis  branch  of  research  by  the  Bureau 
may  have  direct  application  in  the  mining  industry. 

Standardizing  Coal-Mine  Scales 

Another  item  that  may  be  of  particular  interest  to  the 
American  Mining  Congress  is  the  Bureau’s  work  on  investiga- 
tion of  mine-scales.  In  August,  1917,  it  was  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  Bureau  that  a serious  condition  of  affairs  ex- 
isted in  the  coal-fields  of  Allegany  county,  Maryland,  as  a 
result  of  disputes  continually  occurring  between  the  miners 
and  operators  in  regard  to  the  condition  of  the  scales  and 
methods  used  in  weighing  the  coal  mined  by  the  workers,  upon 
which  their  wages  depended.  The  miners  distrusted  the 
weighings  obtained  from  the  scales  in  use,  and  believed  that 
they  were  not  receiving  the  full  amount  of  pay  to  which  they 
were  entitled.  No  method  of  remedying  the  situation  had 
been  found,  and  it  had  become  so  acute  that  a general  strike 
was  impending,  and  would  certainly  have  occurred  had  not 
the  Bureau  promptly  intervened  and  obtained  a postponement 
of  this  action  while  an  investigation  was  conducted.  This 


184  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

matter  was  considered  to  be  of  the  greatest  importance  on 
account  of  the  special  necessity  for  continued  production  of 
coal  at  this  time,  when  it  is  so  vitally  needed. 

No  attempt  was  made  to  test  all  the  scales  in  the  region, 
those  being  selected  for  test  at  mines  where  the  friction  be- 
tween operators  and  employees  was  most  pronounced.  As  a 
corollary  to  the  test  of  scales,  an  investigation  was  conducted 
into  the  matter  of  average  tare  weights  and  other  matters 
closely  related  to  the  accuracy  of  the  weights  obtained. 

It  was  demonstrated  that  the  grievances  of  the  miners  were 
in  many  cases  well-founded.  The  scales  had  in  many  instances 
been  improperly  installed ; no  proper  attention  to  their  main- 
tenance had  been  given  throughout  long  periods  of  sendee; 
and,  in  at  least  one  instance  fraud  in  weighing  was  very 
strongly  indicated.  The  result  of  all  these  conditions  was  that 
very  serious  errors  of  use  were  common — not  a single  scale 
examined  being  within  the  tolerance  allowable  in  such  work; 
moreover,  important  errors  were  in  every  case  in  favor  of  the 
operator. 

This  work  is  being  continued  with  additional  portable  equip- 
ment, and  the  investigation  extended  into  new  mining  regions 
including  the  bituminous  fields  of  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Ohio, 
West  Virginia,  and  Georgia.  In  general,  it  may  be  said  that 
the  tests  made  were  found  to  have  a very  desirable  effect  on 
the  regular  production  of  coal.  In  those  cases  where  the  scales 
were  found  accurate,  distrust  and  suspicions  in  the  minds  of 
the  workers  were  allayed,  and  operations  continued  with  better 
feelings  on  both  sides ; in  other  cases  where  scales  were  found 
to  be  inaccurate,  corrected  measures  were  applied,  and  both 
parties  to  controversies  were  satisfied. 

Sulphur  and  Phosphorous  in  Steel 

Still  another  type  of  co-operative  work  to  which  reference 
may  be  made  is  the  metallurgical  investigation  under  the 
auspices  of  a Joint  Committee  representing  all  interested 
parties  including  Government,  manufacturers,  specification 
making  bodies,  and  large  users  of  steel,  to  determine  from  a 
series  of  experiments  carried  out  on  a large  scale  both  in  the 
plants  and  in  the  laboratory  of  the  effect  of  sulphur  and  phos- 
phorous on  steel,  for  the  purpose  of  arriving  at  fair  limits  of 
these  deleterious  elements  in  the  specifications  for  steel. 


MINE  ACCOUNTING 


185 


From  the  above  illustrations  I trust  to  have  made  it  evident 
that  the  Bureau  of  Standards  in  its  standardization  work  takes 
the  position  that  it  can  be  most  effective  in  co-operating  with 
those  organizations  both  public  and  private  who  are  interested 
in  developing  standards  in  any  particular  field.  It  is  undoubt- 
edly the  case  that  the  mining  industry  will  find  it  to  its  advan- 
tage to  call  on  the  Bureau  not  only  for  experimental  work  in 
determining  fundamental  questions  of  fact  regarding  measure- 
ment and  the  quality  of  material  entering  into  mining  equip- 
ment and  accessories,  but  also  I trust  that  you  will  find  it 
beneficial  to  take  advantage  of  the  experience  that  the  Bureau 
of  Standards  has  had  in  the  past  in  developing  standards  in 
other  lines,  and  I am  instructed  to  say  by  the  Director  that  the 
Bureau  of  Standards  is  at  your  disposal  for  this  purpose. 

Permit  me  to  expresss  my  admiration  for  the  spirit  shown 
in  these  Standardization  Conferences,  and  my  astonishment  at 
the  surprising  amount  of  progress  already  made  in  the  stand- 
ardization field  as  related  to  the  mining  industry.  It  is  hardly 
necessary  for  me  to  emphasize  again  as  so  many  speakers  have 
done,  the  economic  and  far-reaching  benefits  of  standardization 
which  has  abundantly  been  proved  to  be  worth  many  times 
the  cost  in  not  only  money,  but  in  time  and  thought  and  energy 
spent  upon  it.  On  behalf  of  the  Bureau  of  Standards,  there- 
fore, I extend  to  this  Standardization  Conference  our  most 
hearty  congratulations  and  best  wishes  for  continued  pros- 
perity in  the  standardization  field. 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


180 


MINE  ACCOUNTING* 

By  LAWRENCE  K.  DIFFENDERFER,  Treasurer,  Vanadium  Corporation 
of  America,  New  York 

Each  mining  company  seems  to  use  a different  system  of 
accounting.  Because  of  this,  and  because  mines  are  frequently 
in  undesirable  regions,  companies  experience  great  difficulty 
in  securing  competent  mine  accountants.  Recognizing  the 
necessity  of  a uniform  system  of  accounting,  this  paper  is  sub- 
mitted, being  the  result  of  12  years  of  actual  experience  as  a 
mine  accountant.  It  is  not  intended  to  cover  the  technical  part 
of  mine  accounting,  but  the  practical  side;  and  is  for  operat- 
ing heads. 

Too  much  care  cannot  be  exercised  in  the  selection  of  the 
mine  accountant.  He  is  an  invaluable  asset.  He  must  be 
more  than  a bookkeeper,  and  should  understand  all  operations 
about  a mine. 

Mine  accounting  should  be  divided  into  three  general  divi- 
sions, namely:  (1)  “Operating  Expense” ; (2)  “Capital  Ac- 
count”; and  (3)  “Deferred  Charges.” 

Operating  Expense 

This  account  should  cover  all  expenditures  incidental  to 
producing  the  product,  including  items  of  repairs  and  mainte- 
nance, as  well  as  reserves  for  depreciation,  depletion,  obso- 
lescence and  development. 

Capital  Account 

This  account  should  include  all  expenditures  incidental  to 
the  creating  of  a permanent  or  fixed  asset ; and  proper  reserve 
for  depreciation,  obsolescence  and  depletion  should  be  set  up 
and  charged  to  operating  expenses  concurrently. 

Deferred  Charges 

Unless  the  general  balance-sheet  reflects  the  true  financial 
condition  of  a company,  it  is  worthless.  The  true  current 
position  of  a company  is  the  most  important  for  all  financial 
purposes.  The  cost  sheet  is  also  worthless  unless  true  cost  is 
shown,  and  the  greatest  care  should  be  exercised  to  keep  the 
costs  absolutely  correct  and  uniform. 


*An  abstract. 


MINE  ACCOUNTING 


1ST 


Wherever  the  shrinkage  or  overhead  stoping  system  is  in 
use,  generally  one-third  of  the  ore  broken  in  any  given  period 
is  hoisted,  and  the  remaining  two-thirds  held  in  the  stopes 
until  the  level  is  stoped  out. 

In  one  instance,  where  500,000  tons  of  ore  had  been  left  in 
stopes,  which  at  a breaking  cost  of  44  cents  per  ton,  represents 
current  assets  amounting  to  $220,000,  this  was  not  reflected 
in  the  current  position  of  the  company  on  the  general  balance 
sheet.  It  therefore  follows  that  wherever  more  ore  is  broken 
in  any  given  period  than  is  hoisted,  credit  should  be  given  for 
the  same  to  operating  expense  and  charged  to  the  proper  asset 
account  in  the  current  position  of  the  company ; and  whenever 
more  ore  is  hoisted  than  is  broken,  operating  expense  should 
be  charged  for  the  same  and  this  same  account  credited. 

It  is  sometimes  stated  that  this  asset  is  questionable  on 
account  of  the  hazardous  operation,  but  it  should  be  conceded 
that  the  main  shaft  should  be  of  a permanent  nature,  other- 
wise all  operations  in  the  mine  are  jeopardized,  and  should 
the  walls  cave  and  the  ore  which  is  broken  in  stopes  be  lost,  it 
is  a direct  charge  to  income  and  should  not  be  taken  through 
the  current  costs. 

If  prospecting  for  ore  proves  its  existence,  then  the  expense 
of  exploration  should  be  considered  as  a deferred  charge ; if  it 
does  not  prove  ore,  then  the  cost  should  be  charged  direct  to 
income  or  profit  and  loss. 

Development  is  a deferred  charge  and  should  be  so  consid- 
ered. The  main-shaft  station,  grizzly,  and  loading  pockets  are 
capital  expenditures,  and  should  be  capitalized  and  depreci- 
ated. This  can  be  done  on  the  basis  of  number  of  tons  hoisted, 
or  on  a percentage  basis. 

Drifts  and  crosscuts  are  usually  considered  as  development ; 
and  raises  and  chute  holes  to  a point  of  coning  out  are  included 
under  this  head.  Ore  is  usually  recovered  in  development.  It 
is  reasonable  to  assume  that  the  cost  of  tramming,  hoisting, 
and  milling  ore  received  from  development  is  the  same  as  ore 
which  comes  from  stopes,  as  the  ore  from  the  former  and  that 
from  the  latter  cannot  be  kept  separate,  and  therefore  becomes 
mixed.  So  instead  of  keeping  these  costs  separate — which 
costs  are  always  an  estimate  based  upon  percentages — it  is 
better  to  credit  development  ore  at  the  breaking  cost  of  the 
ore  in  the  stopes. 


188  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

Depletion 

Generous  reserves  for  depletion  should  be  set  up  and  credited 
to  reserve  for  depletion,  and  charged  to  operating  expense, 
and  so  shown  on  the  cost  sheet.  The  simplest  and  best  method 
is  to  take  the  number  of  tons  of  ore  that  is  in  reserve,  as  cal- 
culated by  a disinterested  engineer,  and  divide  the  same  into 
the  cost  of  the  property,  exclusive  of  the  amount  expended  for 
development,  or  for  buildings  and  machinery.  It  is  wise  to 
be  conservative  in  this  matter,  and  not  let  the  reserve  be  stated 
higher  than  that  can  be  justified. 

Retirements 

Whenever  a unit  of  equipment  or  building  becomes  obso- 
lete or  useless,  and  is  retired,  the  proper  account  should  be 
credited  with  same  at  cost.  If  the  unit  is  sold,  then  the  pur- 
chaser’s account — accounts  receivable — should  be  charged  at 
the  sales  price.  Reserve  for  depreciation  should  be  charged 
for  the  depreciation  set  up  on  said  unit  of  equipment,  and 
operating  expense  either  debited  or  credited  for  the  loss  or 
profit  on  the  same.  Sometimes  it  is  advisable  to  create  an 
account  on  the  cost  sheet,  entitled  ‘retirements,’  in  order  to 
keep  this  expense  separate. 

Depreciation  and  Obsolesence 

Generous  reserve  should  be  set  up  for  depreciation  and  obso- 
lescence, based  upon  past  experience.  The  Revenue  Law  allows 
the  setting  up  of  depreciation  reserves  based  upon  the  theory 
that  if  the  unit  of  equipment  or  building  has  been  repaired, 
then  it  has  not  depreciated  by  that  amount  which  was  ex- 
pended for  repairs  and  maintenance  in  said  period.  There- 
fore, the  depreciation  rate  should  take  this  fact  into  considera- 
tion at  the  time  of  creating  said  rate,  and  the  repairs  and 
maintenance  should  be  deducted  in  setting  up  the  reserve. 

There  are  only  six  sub-divisions  of  accounting  necessary  at 
a plant;  these  are:  (1)  ‘Working  Fund’;  (2)  ‘Payroll’;  (3) 
‘Stores  (materials  and  supplies)  ’ ; (4)  ‘Shipping  (product  and 
miscellaneous)’;  (5)  ‘Production  Records’;  and  (6)  ‘Depreci- 
ation Ledger.’ 

[Mr.  Diffenderfer’s  paper,  of  which  the  above  is  an  abstract,  included 
13  forms  of  reports  applying  to  these  sub-divisions,  but  as  it  is  imprac- 
ticable to  reproduce  them,  they  are  omitted.] 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


1S9 


STANDARDIZATION  OF  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 

By  T.  O.  McGRATH,  Bisbee,  Ariz. 

Even  though  a mining  property  be  equipped,  with  the  best 
mechanical  appliances,  has  an  organization  of  high  ability, 
and  has  employes  embued  with  the  spirit  of  co-operation,  the 
business  cannot  be  intelligently  managed  without  a knowledge 
of  the  results  of  operation  and  the  condition  of  the  business 
for  each  operating  period,  for  each  department,  and  for  the 
business  as  a whole.  Such  information  is  obtained  by  proper 
accounting. 

Accounting  for  metal  mines  consists  of  three  main  groups, 
namely,  (1)  General  Accounting;  (2)  Cost  Accounting  and 
Statistics;  and  (3)  Economic  Accounting. 

General  accounting  determines  the  condition  of  the  business, 
and  the  profit  and  loss  for  each  operating  period.  Cost  ac- 
counting determines  the  profit  and  loss,  and  the  variation  in 
the  cost  of  each  department  for  each  period  of  operation. 
Economic  acounting  determines  which  of  several  methods  of 
operation  is  most  profitable  under  different  market  prices  of 
metal. 

General  accounting  and  cost  accounting  for  metal  mining 
have  been  fairly  well  developed  during  the  past  10  years,  but 
mostly  along  individual  lines.  So  far,  little  has  been  done  in 
economic  accounting,  although  great  savings  could  be  made 
by  it,  especially  during  periods  when  there  are  wide  fluctua- 
tions in  metal  prices. 

This  discussion  will  be  limited  to  the  fundamental  prin- 
ciples of  general  accounting,  and  to  recommendations  for  a 
standard  system  of  accounting  for  metal  mines. 

General  Accounting 

I am  well  aware  of  the  fact  that  no  standard  system  of  ac- 
counts can  be  devised  that  would  be  applicable  to  each  sepa- 
rate department,  due  to  different  mining  and  metallurgical 
methods.  However,  there  are  certain  basic  principles  that 
can  be  followed,  upon  which  the  accounting  and  cost  structure 
can  be  built  to  obtain  uniformity  in  the  accounting  and  cost 
data  for  each  operating  unit  having  similar  problems. 


190 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


(Q 

I 

■Q 


| 

§ 


\ g 

$1 
‘js  § 

| ^ Q a 

||  I ||| 

lit 

1 

?\ 

|* 

#|*|l 

$ >0  <?  <5; 

Is 

4-^ 

1^ 

$ 

'I 

'S  3 

N * 

■§||  2 


l-Mf 

111 


-|  s 

^ U) 


If 


ll 

II 


^ •* 

|«| 


l 

<3 


|l 

0 V* 

vi  ^ 


S? 


f 

■x  « 

K 

Jx  W 

1? 

§•1 


»)  I'? 

V 6 <> 

l|| 


>>  k 

| 

!* 


* <J 
*5  > 
$ $ 
&s 


*>.§  I I*  <4, 

is  § i.  In,tvx 


.* 


t VJ  tJ 

Ms  5 


Chart  A/*  I 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


101 


Chart  I shows  the  fundamentals  of  the  business  of  mining 
in  the  natural  order  that  must  be  accounted  for  in  any  com- 
plete and  correct  system  of  mine  accounts.  The  business  be- 
gins with  the  capital  investment.  Production  operations  start 
with  the  disbursements  of  working  capital,  which  are  made  in 
order  that  production  may  be  obtained.  This  is  followed  by 
sales  of  the  production  in  order  that  receipts  may  be  created 
by  delivery  of  the  sold  product  to  transportation  agents,  which 
in  turn  is  liquidated  by  cash  payments  from  customers,  and 
this  cash  is  used  with  which  to  meet  new  disbursements,  and 
so  forth.  The  business  of  operation  continues  to  rotate  through 
these  five  stages  as  long  as  there  is  production.  At  the  end  of 
each  period,  results  of  operations  are  shown  in  profit  and  loss, 
dividends  and  surplus,  and  the  condition  of  the  business  is 
shown  by  a balance-sheet. 

These  accounting  and  business  principles  are  uniform  for 
all  metal  mines  and  the  general  accounting  for  metal  mines 
could  be  standardized  with  the  exception  of  the  expense  ac- 
counts, which  would  vary  to  conform  with  the  different  meth- 
ods of  mining  and  treatment. 

Accrued  or  Cash  Basis 

In  working  out  a system  of  accounts,  the  first  matter  that 
must  be  decided  is  whether  the  accounting  shall  be  kept  upon 
an  accrued  or  cash  basis.  At  the  present  time,  most  of  the 
large  corporations  keep  their  accounts  upon  an  accrued  basis, 
which  is  necessary  to  obtain  a complete  and  correct  system  of 
costs.  Therefore  we  may  safely  state  that  the  accrued  basis 
of  accounting  has  been  accepted  as  standard  in  metal  mining. 

t 

Standard  Statements  of  Profits  and  Loss,  and  of  Balance-Sheet 

There  are  two  accounting  statements  that  are  of  vital  in- 
terest to  the  officers,  stockholders,  and  directors  of  each  com- 
pany; also  to  other  units,  and  to  the  investing  public.  These 
are  the  income,  or  profit  and  loss  statement,  for  the  month  and 
year,  and  the  balance-sheet  or  statement  of  the  condition  of 
the  business  at  the  end  of  such  periods. 

There  is  no  reason,  except  lack  of  interest,  for  not  having 
these  two  statements  uniform  for  all  units.  Some  companies 
publish  clear  and  complete  statements  of  profit,  and  of  the 
condition  of  their  business  properly  grouped  and  arranged; 


192  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

while  the  reports  of  others  are  so  drawn  and  arranged  that  it 
is  practically  impossible,  even  for  the  officers,  to  obtain  a satis- 
factory analysis  therefrom.  While  there  has  been  a great 
improvement  in  the  form  and  nature  of  these  two  statements 
since  the  enactment  of  the  income  and  excess-profit  tax  laws, 
there  is  no  reason  why  these  should  not  be  further  improved 
and  made  uniform  for  the  whole  industry.  This  could  easily 
be  accomplished  by  agreeing  upon  uniform  grouping  of  the 
profit  and  loss  statement,  and  balance-sheet. 

If  this  were  obtained,  the  results  and  conditions  of  each 
operating  company  could  easily  be  compared  with  that  of 
other  units,  and  would  be  of  great  value  to  all  concerned.  In 
the  past,  the  result  of  improper  and  incomplete  statements  of 
earnings  has  furnished  the  labor  agitator  with  good  argument 
with  which  to  convince  workmen  that  the  organization  by 
which  they  were  employed  could  well  afford  to  make  unreason- 
able concessions,  as  well  as  leading  the  taxing  commissions  to 
believe  that  such  mines  should  pay  excessive  taxes.  Also  one 
of  the  reasons  for  the  lack  of  interest  in  copper  has  been  at- 
tributed to  the  lack  of  proper  presentation  to  the  general 
public  of  the  facts  of  the  industry  and  its  possibilities.  To 
give  the  consuming  and  general  public  clear  and  concise  facts 
would  without  doubt  be  of  general  benefit  to  the  industry. 

Cost  Accounting 

I do  not  believe  that  it  is  necessary  to  emphasize  the  need 
of  proper  costing;  that  is  self-evident. 

At  the  present  time,  metal  mining  includes  mines,  mills, 
smelters,  and  refineries,  principally  large  units,  employing 
hundreds,  and  in  some  cases,  thousands  of  men.  The  saving 
or  loss  of  a few  cents  per  man  per  day  in  the  use  of  powder, 
tools,  and  other  supplies,  and  in  ‘dead’  time  of  labor,  or  effort 
improperly  expended,  results  income  cases  in  the  difference 
between  profit  and  loss,  especially  during  times  of  low  prices 
for  metals. 

Cost  accounting  in  itself  cannot  obtain-  efficiency,  but  once 
efficient  standards  have  been  obtained  in  the  different  depart- 
ments of  the  organization,  proper  accounting  and  costing  will 
then  show  the  variations  from  these  standards  and  the  source 
of  the  variation,  enabling  the  manager,  department  heads,  and 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


193 


194  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

others  to  correct  immediately  any  deficiency  or  waste  before 
that  unit  has  become  unprofitable. 

I do  not  believe  that  it  is  necessary  to  emphasize  the  need 
of  uniformity  in  compiling  the  accounts  and  costs  by  each  com- 
pany in  metal  mining.  If  each  one  compiled  these  in  a uniform 
and  correct  manner,  results  in  the  various  mines  and  plants 
having  like  methods  and  problems  could  be  compared,  and 
proper  standards  of  achievement  could  be  easier  and  more 
quickly  determined.  Such  uniformity  would  tend  to  broaden 
the  view  and  interest,  and  increase  the  co-operation  among 
the  different  units  of  the  industry,  as  well  as  to  minimize  per- 
sonality and  prejudice,  not  only  among  the  superintendents  of 
labor,  but  among  the  workmen  themselves,  who  become  preju- 
diced by  the  lack  of  uniformity  in  different  mines  or  even  in 
different  divisions  of  the  same  mine. 

Analyzing  the  Disbursements 

Costing  is  concerned  with  analyzing  disbursements  and  pro- 
duction. In  order  that  the  former  may  be  correct  and  uniform, 
disbursements  should  be  segregated  into  the  different  groups 
of  expense,  prepaid  expense,  and  assets.  The  expense  should 
then  be  segregated  to  each  department,  sub-department,  and 
departmental  unit.  Production  should  also  be  segregated  to 
each  department  and  unit,  so  as  to  allow  of  the  determining  of 
the  cost  per  unit  of  production  or  of  operation. 

In  Chart  II,  entitled  ‘Operating  Disbursement  Accounts,’ 
are  all  the  disbursements  segregated  into  expense  and  assets 
that  are  involved  in  the  operation  of  a mine  producing  smelt- 
ing ores.  This  chart  does  not  show  the  administrative  dis- 
bursements for  expense  and  investments,  as  these  are  not 
generally  under  the  direction  of  the  manager. 

This  chart  shows  a complete  record  of  all  disbursements 
whether  current  or  actual,  accrued,  and  deferred.  It  is  best 
to  make  up  such  a chart  of  disbursement  accounts  in  order  to 
insure  that  all  disbursements  are  being  recorded  each  month 
in  proper  manner.  Also,  such  a chart  fixes  the  matter  more 
clearly  in  the  mind,  and  acts  as  a guide  and  reference  for  those 
who  perform  the  work  of  compiling  and  segregating  dis- 
bursements. 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


195 


Principal  Costs 

The  present  practice  is  to  keep  four  kinds  of  costs,  such  as : 

(1)  Production;  (2)  Departmental  Production;  (3)  Unit 
Operating;  (4)  Unit  Construction  and  Equipment  Costs. 

Of  course  there  are  the  estimated  costs  that  are  made  up  by 
the  engineering  department  in  connection  with  proposed  new 
construction  and  equipment,  against  which  the  actual  costs  are 
checked.  The  production  cost  is  obtained  by  dividing  the  total 
production  into  the  items  of  expense  appearing  in  the  profit 
and  loss  account.  In  determining  the  departmental  produc- 
tion cost,  each  department  such  as  ore  extraction,  or  mining, 
milling,  smelting,  etc.,  should  be  divided  into  sub-departments 
to  conform  to  the  actual  organization  and  work  in  each  of  the 
departments.  Then  the  expense  of  the  department  should  be 
segregated  to  each  of  these  sub-departments,  and  the  expense 
for  each  of  the  sub-departments  further  segregated  into  at 
least  six  elements,  namely,  (1)  Labor;  (2)  Supplies;  (3) 
Power;  (4)  Repairs;  (5)  Replacements;  and  (6)  Indirect 
expense. 

By  adding  the  amount  of  the  expense  of  each  element  for 
each  sub-department,  the  total  expense  for  the  department  and 
for  each  element  is  obtained,  and  the  dividing  of  the  produc- 
tion of  the  department  into  the  amount  of  expense  gives  the 
cost  for  each  element  for  each  sub-department,  and  for  the 
department  as  a whole.  By  segregating  the  expense  into  these 
six  elements,  it  is  possible  to  trace  the  variations  in  costs  from 
month  to  month,  and  informs  the  department  head  where  and  ' 
what  to  investigate.  This  method  of  determining  the  depart- 
mental production  costs  is  already  in  general  practice  by  sev- 
eral groups  of  mines.  The  differences  are  in  the  naming  of  the 
accounts  for  the  different  sub-departments,  and  in  the  dividing 
of  the  sub-departments  ; but  these  are  matters  that  could  be 
easily  remedied. 

The  same  method  should  be  followed  in  determining  unit 
operating  costs  except  that  the  elements  of  labor,  supplies,  re- 
pairs, replacements,  and  indirect  expense  should  be  detailed 
into  as  many  items  as  it  is  found  necessary  to  enable  the  trac- 
ing of  all  fluctuations. 

The  unit  operating  cost  is  the  cost  kept  on  each  operating 


196  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

unit  or  sub-department,  as  for  instance  the  cost  of  steam,  air, 
electricity,  cost  of  sinking,  stations,  drifting,  raising,  stoping, 
etc.,  and  are  figured  upon  the  operating  unit  instead  of  upon 
the  production  unit  for  the  department.  It  would  be  of  great 
advantage  to  have  such  costs  obtained  uniformly  by  all  mining 
units. 

Methods  of  Determining  Costs 

There  are  two  principal  methods  of  determining  depart- 
mental and  unit  costs:  First,  the  Departmental  Unit  Method; 
and  second,  the  Departmental  Pro-rated  Method. 

The  former  is  the  dividing  of  each  department  into  sub- 
departments, and  these  into  units  regardless  of  whether  or  not 
they  are  productive  or  overhead  departments,  and  the  segre- 
gating of  the  expense  into  the  proper  elements  and  the  dis- 
tributing of  the  expense  to  each  sub-department  and  unit  which 
is  kept  intact. 

The  second  method  segregates  the  departments  and  expense 
in  a like  manner,  but  further  divides  the  sub-departments  into 
productive  and  overhead  and  pro-rates  the  expense  of  the  over- 
head departments  to  the  productive  departments. 

This  latter  method  is  the  one  used  by  manufacturing  con- 
cerns making  more  than  one  article  for  sale,  when  it  is  neces- 
sary to  get  the  exact  production  cost  for  each  article  in  order 
to  determine  the  proper  selling  price.  However,  in  mining, 
where  there  is  only  one  principal  product,  with  sometimes  a 
. by-product  which  is  treated  as  a credit,  the  pro-rated  method  is 
not  necessary,  and  only  increases  the  amount  of  bookkeeping 
and  segregating,  and  makes  the  costs  more  complicated  and 
difficult  to  comprehend  and  analyze.  The  Departmental  Unit 
Method  should  be  the  one  adopted  as  standard. 

Uniformity  of  Cost  Determinations 

While  it  is  not  probable  that  all  unit  and  departmental  pro- 
duction costs  of  metal  mining  will  be  standardized,  neverthe- 
less the  industry  could  be  divided  into  the  several  groups  that 
mine  and  treat  ores  in  a similar  manner,  and  the  cost  for 
each  of  these  groups  could  be  standardized  and  determined 
uniformly. 

At  the  present  time  there  are  possibilities  of  large  savings  in 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


197 


fuel  and  power  at  most  properties.  It  is  only  occasionally  that 
the  power  costs  are  accurately  determined.  There  are  usually 
large  wastes  in  the  use  of  supplies  and  in  the  purchasing  of 
improper  supplies,  which  could  be  limited  by  correct  cost 
methods  properly  presented. 

The  determining  of  boiler  horse-power,  the  amount  of  com- 
pressed air,  and  of  all  power  and  other  unit  costs  should  be 
and  could  be  made  uniform.  In  some  cases  the  drifting  cost  in 
one  mine  will  be  based  upon  the  actual  expense  at  the  face  of 
the  drift,  while  in  another  mine  in  the  same  district  this  cost 
will  include  the  pro-rated  cost  of  overhead.  This  destroys  the 
possibility  of  comparison  and  applies  to  all  costs  when  com- 
piled by  different  methods. 

Uniformity  in  Compiling  Efficiency  Factors 

Not  only  should  the  cost  data  of  expense  and  production  be 
compiled  in  a uniform  manner,  but  the  production  factors 
necessary  to  determine  efficiency  should  be  uniformly  kept. 
For  instance,  the  shifts  of  men  employed  in  a certain  depart- 
ment or  in  a certain  unit  should  be  compiled  in  like  manner 
each  month,  and  for  each  unit  of  the  industry,  so  that  if  there 
is  any  variation  in  the  output  the  compilation  will  show  the 
facts.  The  feet  advanced  per  man-shift  in  drifts  and  raises, 
and  tons  obtained  per  man-shift  in  stopes,  etc.,  as  well  as  the 
methods  of  determining  mill  and  smelter  recoveries  and  losses, 
should  be  compiled  by  all  companies  in  the  same  manner.  This 
would  enable  one  mine,  mill,  or  smelter  to  determine  quickly 
whether  or  not  the  efficiency  of  the  men  in  its  plant  was  equal 
to  that  of  the  employes  in  another  plant,  working  with  the 
same  equipment  and  under  the  same  conditions,  and  would 
enable  the  department  heads  and  supervisors  to  ascertain 
whether  or  not  better  results  obtained  elsewhere  are  due  to 
better  methods,  equipment,  or  efficiency. 

During  times  of  rapid  advances  in  wages  that  are  based  on  a 
sliding  scale,  as  well  as  rapid  advances  in  prices  of  supplies, 
the  cost  for  one  period  may  show  a decline  over  a previous 
period,  in  spite  of  increase  in  wages  and  supplies,  due  to  an 
increase  of  efficiency  in  the  workmen.  Also,  during  declining 
prices  and  wages  the  cost  may  show  an  advance  in  spite  of  the 
decline  due  to  a loss  in  efficiency.  Therefore,  in  order  to  know 


198  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

positively  the  reason  for  increase  or  decrease  in  the  cost  for 
each  period,  the  necessary  production  factors  should  be  com- 
piled, as  well  as  the  cost  in  dollars.  This  data  should  be  and 
could  be  ascertained  in  a uniform  manner  by  all  units  of  the 
metal  industry. 

Necessity  of  Departmental  Co-operation 

Most  of  the  metal  produced  comes  from  mines  of  large  or- 
ganizations. It  is  the  tendency  for  each  department  of  such 
companies  to  isolate  itself  from  the  others  and  to  become  preju- 
diced and  indifferent  as  to  the  work  of  the  other  departments, 
and  the  business  as  a whole.  When  such  a condition  exists,  it 
is  difficult  to  obtain  correct  accounting  and  cost  data,  and  to 
present  in  proper  form  the  accounting  and  cost  results  for  each 
department,  and  of  the  business  generally. 

Close  association  between  the  heads  of  different  departments 
leads  each  to  a broader  knowledge  of  the  business,  and  to  value 
the  viewpoint  and  to  profit  from  the  knowledge  and  experience 
of  the  others,  as  well  as  tending  to  eliminate  friction  and 
misunderstanding,  and  to  develop  breadth,  consideration,  tact, 
judgment,  and  the  ability  to  co-operate  and  manage,  to  the 
benefit  of  the  whole  organization,  as  well  as  for  each  depart- 
ment. 

Of  course,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  manager  to  co-ordinate  the 
work  of  each  of  the  departments,  and  to  correct  the  extremes 
resulting  from  isolation.  However,  this  is  difficult  to  accom- 
plish when  there  is  not  a close  working  contact  between  the 
departments,  or  when  the  manager  has  obtained  his  prelim- 
inary knowledge  of  the  business  as  the  head  of  an  isolated 
department.  The  better  the  organization  and  working  con- 
tact, the  greater  the  benefit  that  can  be  obtained  from  account- 
ing and  costing. 

In  the  mining  business,  as  in  other  lines  of  industry,  the 
matter  of  first  importance  in  connection  with  an  expenditure 
is  whether  it  is  profitable.  This  point  is  lost  sight  of  more 
often  than  is  usually  realized,  due  principally  to  departmental 
isolation. 

In  some  large  organizations,  thousands  of  dollars  are  ex- 
pended each  month  in  compiling  accounting  and  cost  data  that 


STANDARDIZING  METAL-MINING  ACCOUNTING 


199 


are  never  used  except  for  a record,  due  to  the  fact  that  they  are 
ready  at  such  a late  date,  or  in  such  a manner,  as  to  be  value- 
less to  the  heads  of  operating  departments.  This  waste  could 
be  turned  into  a profit  by  correct  presentation  of  costs  and  a 
closer  working  agreement  between  the  different  departments. 

Uniform  Determination  of  Sales  Price 

There  is  no  uniformity  at  present  in  the  recording  of  sales 
prices  received  for  metals.  For  instance,  in  copper  and  lead 
mining,  some  small  producers  will  show  the  price  received  for 
metal  at  the  net  figure  received  from  the  custom  smelter ; while 
some  of  the  large  producers  will  give  as  the  price  received  the 
net  price  f.  o.  b.  New  York;  and  again  others  give  the  New 
York  price  less  commissions;  while  others  will  show  as  the 
sales  price  the  actual  delivery  price.  This  makes  it  practically 
impossible  to  compile  accurate  statistics  of  prices  received  for 
metals,  and  in  some  cases  where  the  deductions  of  smelters  or 
sales  agents  are  ignored,  the  costs  are  incomplete  and  show  at 
less  than  actual.  This  could  be  easily  remedied  by  adopting 
the  gross  settlement  price  as  standard. 

Summary 

A brief  of  the  principal  points  of  this  discussion  shows  that 
there  should  be  an  earnest  endeavor  to  obtain  in  metal  mining 
the  following: 

(1)  A condensed  standard  form  of  profit  and  loss  state- 
ment in  correct  order  giving  the  actual  results  of 
operations. 

(2)  A standard  form  of  balance-sheet  arranged  in 
proper  groups  and  in  order  showing  the  true  condi- 
tion of  the  business  at  the  end  of  each  period. 

(3)  A standard  system  of  expense  accounts  based  upon 
the  unit  or  control  system,  for  each  group  of  the 
industry. 

(4)  Uniformity  in  the  determination  and  compiling  of 
production  and  operating  factors,  and  of  recoveries 
and  losses  for  use  in  obtaining  costs  and  efficiency. 

(5)  A uniform  method  of  recording  sale  prices  received 
for  metals. 


200  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

In  working  to  obtain  standardization  as  above  set  forth,  we 
should  begin  at  the  top  and  work  down  as  far  as  practicable 
to  carry  out  standardization  of  procedure  without  interfering 
with  individual  requirements,  and  then  confine  efforts  to  ob- 
taining uniformity  in  determining  production  and  operating 
factors  used  for  costing  or  measuring  efficiency. 

I have  tried  to  set  forth  the  principal  advantages  that  would 
accrue  from  such  standardization.  The  reward  of  such  an 
achievement  is  certainly  great  enough  to  justify  our  best 
efforts. 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


201 


A STANDARD  SYSTEM  OF  ACCOUNTING  AND  ANALYSIS  OF 
COST  OF  PRODUCTION 

Presented  by  T.  T.  BREWSTER,  of  the  National  Coal  Association 

The  object  of  the  National  Coal  Association  Committee’s* 
work  is  to  propose  a standard  system  of  accounting  under 
which  all  coal  operators,  so  far  as  the  particular  circumstances 
of  each  case  will  permit,  will  classify  their  operating  expenses 
for  labor  and  material  in  the  same  way,  to  the  end  that  true, 
detailed,  and  comparable  statements  of  cost  of  production  may 
be  readily  obtained;  also  that  all  operators  shall  make  the 
same  distinctions  between  capital  and  operating  expenditures, 
so  that  the  vital  matters  of  depreciation  and  depletion  and 
obsolescence  may  be  treated  with  uniform  consistency  in  ac- 
cordance with  law. 

Preliminary  Considerations 

Before  discussing  the  details  of  an  accounting  system,  it  is 
useful  to  emphasize  the  fundamental  truth  that  every  coal 
mine  consists  of : owned  or  leased  coal  deposits,  plant,  equip- 
ment, and  development. 

They  all  depreciate  together  as  the  coal  is  exhausted,  for 
when  the  coal  is  gone,  or  the  right  to  the  coal  has  elapsed,  the 
plant  and  equipment  have  little  or  no  value  and  the  develop- 
ment is  lost. 

Capital  investment  in  a coal  mine  is  not  a permanent  asset ; 
it  is  only  an  outlay  preliminary  to  the  extraction  of  the  coal ; 
it  is  merely  an  advanced  or  deferred  charge  upon  future  in- 
come, which  capital,  if  recovered,  must  be  recovered  with  the 
current  expenses  of  operation  out  of  the  proceeds  of  coal  sold. 

In  coal  mining,  the  exact  unit  for  the  measurement  of  work 
done  is  the  ton  of  coal  mined.  It  is  also  the  exact  unit  for 
measuring  depletion  of  mineral,  wear  and  tear  from  use  of 
equipment,  and  exhaustion  of  development.  Development  is  a 
mere  easement,  the  value  of  which  disappears  when  the  coal 
is  gone. 


*The  Committee  consisted  of  C.  E.  Backus,  T.  T.  Brewster,  W.  M. 
Henderson,  J.  C.  Osgood,  and  Erskine  Ramsey,  with  W.  B.  Reed  as  secretary. 


202  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

A coal  mine  being,  as  emphasized,  made  up  of  several  ele- 
ments, all  depreciating  as  the  coal  is  mined,  such  depreciation 
is  composite,  accruing  at  a rate  concurrent  with  the  rate  of 
extraction.  The  necessary  rate  per  ton  being  determined,  the 
aggregate  depreciation  for  any  accounting  period  should,  of 
course,  as  far  as  practical,  be  distributed  among  the  various 
elements  in  proportion  to  their  respective  costs  or  value. 

The  doctrine  that  measures  depreciation  of  coal  mining 
plant  and  equipment  in  terms  of  time — excepting  of  course, 
some  leasehold  propositions — is  fallacious,  as  tested  by  the 
further  assertion  that  a completely  equipped  mine  could  be 
maintained  indefinitely  without  depletion  or  wear  and  tear  if 
no  coal  were  mined,  by  minor  repairs.  Therefore,  we  insist, 
as  a general  rule — excepting  some  leaseholds — that  the  correct 
measure  of  the  depletion  and  depreciation  experienced  in  min- 
ing coal  is  the  ton  of  coal  mined. 

After  a coal  mine  has  been  developed  and  equipped  to  its 
planned  output  capacity,  charges  to  its  Capital  Account  should 
cease,  and  thereafter  there  will  be  few  if  any  permissible 
charges  to  that  account. 

At  the  end  of  each  month,  Operating  Account  should  be 
charged,  and  Depreciation  and  Depletion  credited  with  an 
amount  equivalent  to  the  depreciation  rate  multiplied  by  the 
number  of  tons  mined  during  the  month.  At  the  end  of  the 
year,  Depreciation  should  be  charged  with  the  year’s  accumu- 
lation, and  the  respective  elements  of  the  mine  written  off  in 
proper  proportions.  If,  • however,  the  operator  prefers  to 
allow  total  Depreciation  to  stand  as  a credit  on  the  ledger,  it 
should  be  exhibited  in  the  Balance  Sheet  as  a deduction  from 
the  cost  of  property.  Irrespective  of  which  way  if  is  handled 
on  the  general  ledger,  the  proper  reducing  entries  should  be 
made  against  each  element  of  the  property  in  the  plant  ledger. 

In  the  case  of  mines  operated  under  lease,  if  the  leasehold 
rights  run  longer  than  the  probable  period  required  to  exhaust 
the  estimated  available  coal,  the  same  factor  of  Depreciation 
applies ; but  if  the  life  of  the  lease  is  shorter  than  the  probable 
period  required  to  get  all  the  coal,  the  monthly  charge  to  Oper- 
ating Account  and  corresponding  credit  to  Depreciation  should 
be  such  proportion  of  the  cost  of  the  mine  as  one  month  is  of 
the  remaining  term  of  the  lease. 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS  208 

Funds  representing  Depreciation  accumulations,  if  not  peri- 
odically applied  to  the  retirement  of  outstanding  securities  or 
obligations,  should  be  kept  liquid  for  that  purpose  or  invested 
in  assets  distinct  from  the  depreciating  property. 

Before  any  profit  or  net  income  can  be  realized,  current  ex- 
penses for  labor  and  for  material  consumed,  current  repairs, 
replacements,  and  depreciation  must  be  made  good  out  of 
gross  income.  Hence,  sound  consideration  of  the  nature  of 
investment  in  coal  mining  or  any  other  wasting  industry 
dictates  that  all  outlay  must  be  clossified  and  dealt  with  as 
follows : 

(a)  The  initial  cost  of  the  mine  in  its  entirety,  chargeable 
to  Capital  Account — which  must  be  redeemed  by  periodically 
setting  aside,  from  current  gross  income,  sufficient  amounts  to 
replace  such  investment  within  the  life  of  the  mine.  It  is 
obvious  that  the  fund  thus  derived  must  be  held  inviolate  for 
ultimate  capital  redemption,  and  if  not  applied  immediately 
to  the  retirement  of  outstanding  securities,  invested  in  assets 
separate  from  the  depreciating  property  or  kept  liquid  in  the 
business. 

(b)  The  cost  of  additions  and  betterments,  so  large  that 
such  costs  should  be  capitalized,  must  likewise  be  redeemed  by 
setting  aside  from  gross  income  adequate  provision  for  reim- 
bursing such  cost  during  the  life  of  the  mine. 

(c)  To  ordinary  Operating  Expense  should  be  charged  the 
cost  of  repairs  and  replacements  of  plant  and  equipment,  and 
also  cost  of  additional  equipment  necessary  because  of  the 
extension  of  workings  to  maintain  the  normal  output. 

Distinction  Between  Capital  and  Operating  Expenditures 

The  drawing  of  distinctions  between  capital  and  operating 
expenditures,  in  the  accounting  involved  in  permanent  enter- 
prises, is  a favorite  field  for  discussion  among  accountants, 
but  in  the  case  of  coal  mining  or  other  wasting  enterprises, 
experience  teaches  that  the  field  for  discussion,  if  indeed  there 
be  any,  is  extremely  limited. 

After  a coal  mine  has  been  developed  and  equipped  to  its 
contemplated  or  possible  capacity,  it  is  a constant  consumer  of 
material  and  supplies  and  equipment,  which,  though  nominally 
of  a durable  nature,  are  subject  to  destructive  wear  and  tear, 


204  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

by  reason  of  the  uses  to  which  they  are  put,  and  all  these  ap- 
pliances must  be  kept  in  repair  to  do  their  work  or  the  output 
can  not  be  maintained. 

Mules  and  pit  cars  are  constantly  worn  out,  and  have  to  be 
replaced,  and  as  the  working  faces  advance  with  the  exhaus- 
tion of  the  coal,  the  length  of  haul,  and  consequent  time  of 
circulation  of  pit  cars  between  the  working  face  and  dump 
increases,  more  motors,  mules,  and  pit  cars  have  to  be  supplied 
to  maintain  the  output,  and  the  more  of  these  in  the  mine,  the 
greater  expense  for  replacements  and  repairs. 

Also,  with  the  advance  of  workings,  more  rails  have  to  be 
laid  and  more  copper  wire  or  other  conductors  put  up  to  carry 
power  to  the  working  forces  to  maintain  the  output.  They 
remain  in  place  until  the  mine  is  exhausted,  and  wThen  they  are 
recovered  have  but  little  net  scrap  value.  In  fact,  any  net 
salvage  is  relatively  very  small. 

The  fact  that  these  expenses  are  continually  recurrent  and 
practically  a fixed  factor  in  the  cost  of  production  per  ton  from 
year  to  year,  prove  that  they  constitute  an  operating  rather 
than  a capitalizable  expense. 

Obsolesence 

In  addition  to  the  provisions  for  depreciation  and  depletion 
to  replace  the  capital  sum  invested  in  depreciable  property  and 
charges  for  ordinary  working  expenses,  Operating  Account 
should  be  charged  with  the  residual  value  of  property  (after 
deducting  depreciation,  which  has  been  or  should  have  been 
charged,  and  insurance)  that  may  be  destroyed  by  catas- 
trophe; also  Operating  Account  should  be  charged  with  the 
residual  value  over  accrued  depreciation  and  salvage  of  any 
property  discarded  or  that  has  become  useless  or  obsolete  be- 
fore the  end  of  the  natural  period  of  its  usefulness. 

Necessity  of  Detailed  Analysis 

If  the  only  object  of  an  operator’s  periodical  statements 
were  to  exhibit  the  financial  results  of  the  period  covered,  or 
to  contribute  to  general  statistics,  a short  form  with  a few 
sub-totals  and  their  extensions  would  be  all  required ; but  the 
successful  solution  of  the  problems  facing  the  industry  de- 
mands intensive  management  and  economy,  and  as  intensive 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


205 


management  means  careful  and  intelligent  attention  to  detail, 
analytical  acounting  is  necessary. 

The  operating  executive  should  have  a report  from  each 
mine,  which,  read  in  the  light  of  his  knowledge  of  the  prop- 
erty, will  be  a comprehensive  narrative  of  what  has  been  done, 
and  reflect  the  physical  conditions  met  with  during  the  period 
covered  by  the  report,  and  exhibit  a clear  statement  of  the  cost 
of  labor  and  material  expended,  classified  in  accordance  with 
the  natural  sub-divisions  of  the  work  that  has  to  be  done  in 
and  about  a mine,  so  that  the  economy  and  efficiency  with 
which  each  thing  has  been  done  can  be  studied  critically. 

In  the  majority  of  cases,  the  natural  sub-divisions  of  the 
work  in  and  around  a coal  mine  are  as  follows : 


1. 

Mine  office. 

10. 

Haulage  and  hoisting. 

2. 

Superi  ntendence. 

11. 

Dumping  and  tallying. 

3. 

Engineering. 

Mining. 

12. 

Preparation. 

4. 

13. 

Railroad  car  loading 
and  yard  expense. 

5. 

Timbering. 

14. 

Power. 

6. 

Deadwork.  * 

15. 

Repairs  to  buildings 

7. 

8. 
9. 

Tracklaying. 

Drainage. 

Ventilation. 

16. 

and  permanent  struc- 
tures. 

Sundries. 

To  these  sub-divisions  should  be  distributed  the  items  below : 

Mine  Office  Expense — Clerk,  bookkeepers,  janitors*  books  of 
account,  stationery,  office  funiture  and  supplies,  telephone, 
light,  heat,  etc. 

Superintendence — Wages  of  superintendents,  bosses,  mine 
examiners,  watchmen,  and  all  other  direction  and  caring  for 
the  property  in  a supervisory  capacity.  Safety  lamps,  mine 
telephone,  etc. 

Engineering — Mining  engineer,  helper,  engineering  instru- 
ments and  supplies,  maps,  blueprints,  etc. 

Mining — (a)  Hand  mining.  Miners,  helpers,  shot-firers, 
etc.  (b)  Machine  mining.  In  machine  mines  this  item  should 
be  sub-divided  into  undercutting  and  pit-car  loading.  Under- 
cutting should  be  charged  with 


206  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

(a)  Generation  and  transmission  of  power,  that  is,  the 
proportionate  share  of  cost  of  power  generated  and 
its  transmission  to  machines  (see  note  on  power 
below) . 

(b)  Maintenance  of  machines,  that  is,  repair  parts,  ma- 
chine picks,  cable  for  electric  machine,  and  air-hose 
for  air  machines.  Shop  and  repair-men  employed 
on  machines  and  labor  of  blacksmiths  sharpening  or 
making  bits  and  such  part  of  the  time  of  head  elec- 
trician spent  in  maintenance  of  machines. 

(c)  Operating  machines:  To  this  sub-division  should 
be  charged  the  wages  of  machine  runners  and  help- 
ers, bit  carriers,  oil,  grease  and  waste,  oil-cans,  hand 
picks,  pick  handles,  jacks,  machine-shovels,  etc.  If 
machines  are  not  equipped  with  self-propelling 
trucks  and  the  machines  are  moved  about  their  sec- 
tions by  mule  haulage,  such  haulage  should  be 
charged  to  operating  machines. 

Pit-car  loading  needs  no  comment. 

Timbering — Though  timbering  is  imposed  by  physical  con- 
ditions and  is  closely  incident  to  work  at  the  face,  it  is  a sig- 
nificant item,  and  should  stand  by  itself.  To  this  sub-divi- 
sion should  be  distributed  wages  of  timbermen  and  helpers, 
the  cost  of  props,  cap-pieces,  cross-bars  and  other  timber  used 
in  advancing  work,  such  cost  including  freight  and  the  cost 
of  unloading  and  handling  at  the  mine,  with  the  expense  of 
preparing  and  delivering  to  the  working  face. 

Deadwork — As  every  mine  presents  physical  conditions 
peculiar  to  itself,  no  two  mines  being  alike,  and  as  the  phys- 
ical conditions  fluctuate  as  the  work  progresses,  in  order  to 
work  out  comparable  statements  and  records,  deadwork 
should  be  classified  in  accordance  with  its  nature,  such  as 
yardage,  premium  for  narrow  work,  shooting  rock,  lifting 
bottom,  taking  down  top,  stowing  and  dumping  gob,  clean- 
ing up  falls  and  re-timbering  after  them,  handling  squeezes, 
mine  fires,  or  any  other  work  imposed  by  adverse  physical 
conditions. 

Tracklaying — While  track  is  immediately  connected  with 
and  necessary  for  the  transportation  of  coal  to  the  shaft  bot- 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


207 


tom,  and  hence  a necessary  item  incident  to  haulage,  it  has 
long  been  regarded  as  a significant  item  in  the  cost  sheet,  and 
should  stand  by  itself. 

To  this  account  should  be  charged  rails,  ties,  spikes,  and 
fastenings,  and  the  labor  of  grading  roads  and  tracklaying  in 
advancing  work.  Repairs  to  track  should  be  charged  to  Haul- 
age and  Hoisting,  under  maintenance  of  way. 

Purchases  of  track  material  should  be  charged  to  track 
material  account,  and  as  the  material  is  taken  into  the  mine  it 
should  be  credited  and  charged  Tracklaying. 

Drainage — To  this  sub-division  should  be  charged  the  cost 
of  labor  employed  in  connection  with  the  ordinary  removal 
of  water  from  the  workings  of  the  mine,  with  the  expense  of 
repairs  and  maintenance  of  pumps,  pipe-lines,  drains;  also 
the  proper  proportion  of  power  used.  In  some  regions  and 
in  deep  mines  the  tonnage  of  water  handled  and  consequent 
consumption  of  power  is  very  heavy. 

In  the  event  of  a flood  or  extraordinary  inflow  of  water, 
the  expense  of  recovering  the  mine  or  flooded  workings  should 
be  shown  as  a special  and  separate  charge  to  Operating  Ac- 
count. 

Ventilation — To  ventilation  should  be  charged  proper  pro- 
portion of  Power  expense  to  represent  power  used  in  driving 
fans.  If  cross-cuts  are  driven  narrow  because  of  physical 
conditions,  the  yardage  should  be  charged  under  Deadwork. 

Labor  and  material  used  in  closing  cross-cuts,  constructing 
overcasts,  mine  doors,  curtains  and  brattice,  should  be  charged 
to  Ventilation;  also  expense  of  cleaning  and  repairing  air- 
courses.  Repairs  and  lubrication  of  fan  and  fan  engine,  pres- 
sure gauges,  etc.,  should  be  charged  to  Ventilation. 

While  trappers  are  rendered  necessary  in  connection  with 
ventilating  doors,  their  work  is  incident  to  haulage  of  coal, 
and  their  wages  should  be  charged  to  Hauling  and  Hoisting 
under  conducting  transportation. 

Haulage  and  Hoisting  should  be  separated  into 

1.  Generation  and  Transmission  of  Power;  that  is,  the  pro- 
portion of  expense  of  generating  power  and  the  construction 
and  keeping  up  of  transmission-lines  and  haulage  circuits. 


208  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

2.  Care  and  Maintenance  of  Equipment — (a)  Hoisting  and 
haulage  engine  repair  parts,  lubricants,  packing  and  waste,  and 
wages  of  hoisting  engine-man  and  mechanics  employed  in  care 
and  repair.  Hoisting  and  haulage  ropes,  cage  repairs,  and 
replacement;  safety  devices,  guides,  and  sheaves. 

(b)  Care  and  maintenance  of  motors.  When  motor  haul- 
age is  used,  repair  parts,  and  labor  of  care  and  repair. 

(c)  Care  and  maintenance  of  pit  cars.  Labor  and  material 
used  in  keeping  pit  cars  in  repair.  New  cars  replacing 
wrecked  or  worn-out  cars,  also  additional  cars  necessary  to 
maintain  output  by  reason  of  increasing  length  of  haul  after 
mine  has  reached  its  contemplated  output  capacity. 

(d)  Care  and  maintenance  of  livestock;  such  as  harness 
and  stable  supplies.  Grain  and  hay,  and  wages  of  stable-men 
and  veterinary,  clipping  and  shoeing,  etc.  New  mules  replac- 
ing killed  or  worn-out  animals  should  be  charged  to  mainte- 
nance of  livestock. 

3.  Conducting  transportation.  Drivers,  boss  drivers,  mo- 
tormen,  trip  riders,  couplers,  cagers  and  pushers,  oilers  (oil 
and  grease)  trappers  and  switch-throwers,  jackmen,  and  that 
part  of  hoisting  engine-man’s  wages  not  charged  to  mainte- 
nance and  repairs. 

4.  Maintenance  of  way;  that  is,  repairs  to  roads,  cleaning 
roads,  relaying  track,  new  ties,  rollers  for  rope  haulage,  etc. 

Dumping  and  Tallying — Top  cagers,  pushers  and  dumpers, 
weigh  boss,  check  puller  and  track  weighman. 

Preparation — The  proportion  of  power  used  in  operating 
screens,  crushers,  elevators,  conveyors,  picking-tables,  spiral- 
izers,  loading  booms,  etc.,  and  the  cost  of  the  labor  of  attend- 
ants thereon,  such  as  inspectors,  dock  bosses,  sulphur  and  slate- 
pickers,  and  the  labor  of  disposing  of  waste,  all  material  and 
labor  involved  in  the  maintenance  of  repairs  and  replacements 
of  such  apparatus  as  is  used  in  the  preparation  of  coal. 

If  a washer  is  operated,  such  investment  and  its  operation 
should  stand  by  itself.  The  washer  should  be  charged  with 
the  expense  of  operation,  repairs,  maintenance,  insurance, 
and  its  proper  depreciation,  with  the  value  of  the  raw  coal 
passed  through  it,  either  at  cost  of  production,  or,  preferably, 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


209 


at  the  market  value  obtainable  for  raw  coal,  and  credited  with 
the  out-turn  of  washed  product. 

If  the  result  is  a credit  balance,  it  should  be  taken  into 
operating  income  as  net  income  from  washer;  if  it  results  in 
a debit  balance,  it  should  be  deducted  from  operating  income 
as  loss  on  washer  operations. 

Railroad  Car  Loading  and  Yard  Expense — To  this  sub-divi- 
sion should  be  charged  wages,  of  yard  boss,  car  cleaners,  trim- 
mers, car  riders,  car  haulers,  brakemen,  and  all  material  and 
supplies  used  by  them. 

The  expense  of  maintaining  and  operating  mine  tracks,  if 
a switch  engine  is  employed,  or  if  switching  is  done  by  the 
railroad  for  which  a special  charge  is  made,  distinct  from  the 
freight  rate,  the  expense  thereof  should  be  charged  to  this 
sub-division. 

Power — The  generation  and  transmission  of  power  is  about 
the  only  expense  about  a coal  mine  that  is  not  in  total  directly 
chargeable  to  some  one  sub-division  of  operating  work.  To 
it  should  be  charged  the  wages  of  firemen,  fuel-men,  ash- 
haulers,  water-men,  pump-men,  generator  and  compressor 
attendants,  and  such  part  of  hoisting  engine-man’s  and  elec- 
trician’s time,  or  other  labor  and  material,  as  may  be  em- 
ployed in  the  care,  repair  and  maintenance  of  boilers,  pumps, 
engines,  generators,  air-compressors  or  other  power-gener- 
ating machinery;  wire  and  pipe  used  in  transmission-lines, 
cost  of  water  supply  and  all  coal  consumed,  preferably  at  its 
market-value.  The  cost  of  coal  to  the  operator  for  his  own 
consumption  is  what  he  could  get  for  it  in  the  market.  If  an 
unmerchantable  product  is  used  under  the  boilers,  it  should 
be  charged  at  its  cost  of  production.  If  cost  of  fuel  is  not 
included  in  cost  of  power,  the  accounts  do  not  exhibit  true 
cost.  The  true  cost  should  be  before  the  operate  to  induce 
him  to  estimate  the  possibilities  of  effecting  savings  by  im- 
proving his  plant  or  boiler  room  practice;  also  to  estimate 
the  possibility  of  effecting  economy  by  purchasing  power  of 
outside  service  companies,  or  through  establishing  central 
power  plants.  The  tonnage  consumed  per  annum  under  new 
boilers  by  large  producers  is  very  large,  and  the  cost  thereof 
should  be  clearly  shown. 


-10 


PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 


If  outside  power  is  purchased,  it  should  be  charged  to 
Power. 

Distribution  of  Power  Costs 

The  expense  of  power  should  then  be  distributed  to  the 
different  sub-divisions  of  Operating  Expense,  in  accordance 
with  the  proportion  of  power  employed  in  each  section  of  the 
work. 

Mining,  under  the  sub-division  Undercutting,  should  be 
charged  with  the  proportion  of  power  applied  to  machine 
operation. 

Haulage  and  Hoisting  should  be  charged  under  Generation 
and  Transmission  of  Power,  with  its  proportion  of  power- 
house expense,  as  represents  the  power  used  by  hoisting 
engines  and  haulage  engines  and  motors. 

Under  the  sub-division  Preparation  should  be  charged  the 
power  used  for  shaker-screens,  picking  tables,  etc. 

Ventilation  should  be  charged  with  the  share  of  expense  of 
power-house,  in  accordance  with  the  power  used  for  driving 
fans. 

Drainage,  with  the  proper  proportion  of  power  used  in 
pumping  water  from  the  mine. 

The  above  suggestion  that  the  expense  of  power  should  be 
distributed  to  the  various  sub-divisions  of  the  work  may  ap- 
pear difficult  to  the  accountant,  and  in  small  operations  such 
distribution  may  be  a needless  refinement;  and  in  such  cases 
power  may  well  be  shown  as  an  undistributed  item  of  oper- 
ating expense. 

However,  in  large  operations,  the  cost  of  power  is  a large 
item,  and  the  making  up  of  a heat  and  steam  balance  will  not 
be  difficult  to  the  well-informed  engineer  or  electrician. 

The  measurement  of  fuel  and  water  and  steapi  generation  1 
compared  with  the  useful  work  being  done,  will  prove  fruit 
ful  in  results.  Such  time  and  effort  is  well  spent,  as  it  lead® 
to  the  detection  of  steam  line  leakages,  engine  cylinders  and 
valves  in  bad  condition,  insufficient  power  circuits,  bad  track 
bonding,  etc.  The  coal  operator  who  wastes  coal  by  overlook- 
ing preventable  losses  is  like  the  merchant  who  consumes  his 
own  stock. 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


211 


In  his  lucid  and  valuable  book  entitled  ‘Preventing  Losses 
in  Factory  Power  Plants/  David  Moffat  Myers  well  says: 

“Just  as  the  expert  accountant  is  able  to  analyze  the  expen- 
diture of  one  hundred  dollars  in  a business  enterprise  and  to 
show  where  some  of  them  are  wasted  or  mis-spent,  and  finally 
to  strike  a true  balance  between  income  and  expenditure, 
just  as  truly  and  with  as  great  a degree  of  accuracy  a trained 
engineer  may  analyze  and  balance  the  expenditure  of  energy 
from  the  original  one  hundred  per  cent  income  or  input,  to  the 
final  machine  horsepower  hours  of  useful  work,  and  in  so 
doing  he  may  point  out  where  certain  portions  of  this  energy 
are  mis-spent  or  wasted,  and  how  they  may  be  saved  and  con- 
verted into  useful  work. 

“There  does  not  exist  a power  problem  that  is  not  capable 
of  solution  by  the  intelligent  application  of  these  principles  of 
analysis.” 

Repairs  to  Buildings  and  Structures — To  this  item  should 
be  charged  labor  and  material  used  in  repairs  of  permanent 
buildings  and  structures  of  the  surface  mining  plant. 

Sundries — Small  and  unimportant  items  of  expense  not 
easily  distributable  to  the  above  sub-divisions  of  Expense. 

Necessity  of  Contingent  Reserve 

In  the  case  of  permanent  enterprises,  the  funds  derived 
from  charges  to  operating  cost  to  cover  depreciation  and 
depletion  are  to  replace  plant  and  equipment  becoming  worn 
out  or  obsolete;  but  in  coal  mining  or  other  wasting  enter- 
prises, the  purpose  of  such  fund  is  to  replace  and  redeem  the 
capital  invested  in  the  wasting  assets,  and  such  duty  of  re- 
demption fully  taxes  the  allowable  charge  for  depletion  and 
depreciation. 

As  a general  rule,  the  buildings  and  major  items  of  plant 
and  equipment  placed  at  a coal  mine  are  calculated  to  last,  and, 
with  proper  care  and  repair,  do  last  the  life  of  the  mine,  and 
therefore  obsolescence  of  coal  mine  plant  and  equipment  re- 
sults more  often  from  accident  than  by  installation  of  new 
appliances.  Depletion  and  depreciation  are  items  of  prime 
cost  which  can  be  measured  with  reasonable  exactness  and 
properly  provided  for  by  charges  to  current  expense  of  opera- 
tion; but  coal  mining  is  a hazardous  business,  and  in  some 
regions  extra  hazardous,  and  obsolescence  being  a contin- 


212  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

gency,  common  prudence  dictates,  in  order  to  avoid  possible 
financial  embarrassment,  that  there  should  be  periodically  re- 
served and  built  up  from  net  income  sufficient  provision  to 
meet  any  probable  contingency.  Such  reserve  is  not  an  item 
of  current  cost,  and  therefore  not  deductible  in  determining 
taxable  income,  but  the  cost  upon  the  realization  of  the  con- 
tingency is  a proper  charge  to  current  expense,  and  should 
then  be  so  charged,  and  not  be  charged  to  contingent  reserve. 

The  increase  in  current  expense,  by  reason  of  such  happen- 
ing, will  reduce  current  net  income,  and  therefore  a corre- 
sponding amount,  or  as  much  thereof  as  may  be  possible 
should  be  transferred  from  contingent  reserve  to  Profit  and 
Loss. 

The  general  conditions  existing,  and  the  experience  of  any 
mine  or  mining  region,  will  dictate  to  the  operator  the  neces- 
sary provision  for  contingencies. 

Though  maintenance  expense  is  practically  a constant  fac- 
tor of  current  expense  in  coal  mining,  prudence  also  suggests 
in  accordance  with  the  peculiarities  of  each  case  the  segrega- 
tion from  income  of  a maintenance  reserve. 

Balance-Sheet 

This  should  show  the  exact  details  of  the  financial  condition 
of  the  business  and  be,  at  the  same  time,  an  historical  narra- 
tive of  the  enterprise.  The  value  of  the  balance-sheet  will  be 
in  exact  measure  of  the  time  spent  on  its  production  and  con- 
sideration. The  more  put  into  a balance-sheet,  the  more  can 
be  got  out  of  it. 

[A  suggestion  as  to  a pro  forma  balance-sheet  was  sub- 
mitted by  Mr.  Brewster,  but  this  has  been  omitted.] 

Bookkeeping 

In  the  foregoing,  the  principles  of  accounting  have  been 
touched  upon,  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  write  a treatise  on 
bookkeeping,  but  it  may  be  useful  to  refer  to  the  main  books 
required  and  to  comment  upon  the  action  of  the  various  oper- 
ating accounts.  The  principal  books  of  account  are:  Gen- 
eral Ledger,  Cash  Book,  Journal,  Voucher  Register,  Sales 
Register,  Coal  Customers’  Ledger. 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


213 


The  Ledger,  Cash  Book,  and  Journal  need  no  comment. 

Voucher  Register — To  avoid  a multiplicity  of  ledger  ac- 
counts, with  miscellaneous  creditors  from  whom  material  and 
supplies  are  purchased,  the  adoption  of  the  voucher  system  is 
recommended.  The  Voucher  Register  appropriately  ruled, 
both  horizontally  and  perpendicularly  to  allow  the  entry  of 
number,  name  of  payee,  what  for,  date  paid,  and  the  distribu- 
tion under  the  different  headings  of  the  amount  thereof  to  the 
account  or  accounts  to  which  the  items  covered  by  the  voucher 
are  chargeable.  At  the  end  of  each  month  the  total  footing 
should  be  credited  to  vouchers  payable,  and  the  footings  of 
the  various  distribution  columns  charged  to  the  respective 
accounts.  Some  accountants  post  to  the  General  Ledger  direct 
from  the  Voucher  Register,  but  we  recommend  a journal 
entry  and  posting  from  the  Journal. 

Every  cash  disbursement  should  be  represented  by  a 
voucher,  and  charged  on  the  Cash  Book  to  vouchers  payable, 
with  entry  of  the  number  of  the  voucher  and  name  of  the 
payee. 

Payments  should  be  checked  from  the  Cash  Book  into  the 
when-paid  column  of  the  Voucher  Register;  thus  the  con- 
trolling account  in  the  General  Ledger  covering  miscellaneous 
creditors  will  be  vouchers  payable,  and  the  General  Ledger 
balance  of  this  account  will  agree  with  the  total  of  an  abstract 
of  unpaid  vouchers  drawn  from  the  Voucher  Register. 

Sales  Register — In  cases  where  coal  is  consigned  through 
from  the  mine,  a convenient  form  of  Sales  Register  page  is  a 
manifest  of  billing  with  columns  on  the  right-hand  side,  for 
the  entry  at  general  office  of  price  and  extension  of  amount, 
these  pages  to  be  carried  in  a loose-leaf  binder  until  the  end  of 
the  year,  when  they  should  be  permanently  bound. 

The  amount  of  each  invoice  should  be  posted  from  the  sales 
sheet  to  the  debit  of  the  customer’s  account  in  the  Coal  Cus- 
tomers’ Ledger.  At  the  end  of  the  month  the  total  should  be 
taken  up  in  a journal  entry,  charging  coal  customers  and 
crediting  the  coal  sales  account  of  the  mine  from  which  the 
coal  is  shipped. 

As  payments  are  received  from  coal  customers,  they  should 
be  credited  to  coal  customers  in  the  Cash  Book.  Names  with 


214  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

the  amounts  paid  by  each  customer  entered  in  “short.”  From 
the  Cash  Book  should  be  posted  the  “shorts”  to  the  individual 
accounts  in  the  Coal  Customers'  Ledger;  thus  the  controlling 
account  in  the  General  Ledger  representing  amounts  due  from 
coal  customers  will  be  coal  customers,  and  the  total  balance  of 
individual  accounts  in  the  Coal  Customers’  Ledger  will  sup- 
port the  balance  in  the  General  Ledger. 

Revenue  Accounts 

Coal  Sales — A coal-sales  account  with  each  mine  to  be  cred- 
ited with  the  invoice  value  of  coal  sales,  as  per  Sales  Register. 
To  this  account  should  be  charged  any  freights  prepaid  and 
included  in  the  invoice  price,  and  any  allowances  and  adjust- 
ments, and  this  account  closed  out  monthly  to  the  credit  of 
Operating  Account  of  the  mine  from  which  the  coal  is  shipped. 

Rent  of  Divellings — These  are  credited  with  rents  received ; 
charged  with  the  care,  painting  and  repairs,  taxes,  insurance 
and  depreciation ; and  are  closed  out  monthly  to  the  credit  of 
Operating  Account  for  the  mine  to  which  the  houses  belong. 

Farming  Operations  are  credited  with  the  value  of  crops, 
timber  cut,  rents,  if  rented,  etc. ; and  charged  with  labor  and 
supplies,  repairs  to  machinery  and  buildings,  small  imple- 
ments, fertilizer,  etc.,  taxes,  insurances  and  depreciation.  If 
the  farm  property  is  identified  with  a particular  mine,  close 
out  to  the  credit  of  the  Operating  Account  of  said  mine;  or 
if  not  identified  with  a particular  mine,  close  out  to  income 
account. 

Washer  Operating  Account  is  credited  with  the  proceeds  of 
raw  coal  sent  to  the  washer,  labor  and  supplies,  repairs  to 
buildings  and  machinery,  small  tools,  water-supply  expense, 
taxes,  insurance,  and  depreciation.  If  identified  with  a par- 
ticular mine,  close  out  each  month  to  debit  or  credit  of  Oper- 
ating Account  of  said  mine.  If  a central  washer  plant,  close 
out  to  Income  Account. 

Coke-Plant  Operations  are  credited  with  proceeds  of  coke 
sold;  and  charged  with  value  of  raw  coal  sent  to  coke  plant, 
labor  in  and  about  plant,  repairs,  material  and  supplies,  small 
tools,  taxes,  insurance  on,  and  depreciation  of  buildings.  If 
identified  with  a particular  mine,  close  out  to  Operating  Ac- 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


..215 


count  of  said  mine.  If  a central  plant,  close  out  to  Income 
Account. 

Mercantile  Operations — If  the  store  is  identified  with  a 
particular  mine,  results  of  the  store  business  should  be  closed 
out  to  the  Income  Account  of  such  mine.  If  not  identified 
with  a particular  mine,  the  results  of  the  store  business  should 
be  carried  to  Income  Account. 

Expense  Accounts 

General  Expense  is  charged  with  the  salaries  and  expenses 
of  officers;  directors’  fees,  legal  expense,  general  office  rent, 
books,  stationery,  telephone  and  telegraph;  all  other  expenses 
of  administration  and  maintaining  corporate  existence. 

Close  out  by  charging  to  the  Operating  Account  of  each 
mine  with  such  mine’s  just  proportion.  This  is  generally  pro- 
rated in  accordance  with  the  tonnage  furnished  by  each  mine. 

Selling  Expense — All  expenses  connected  with  the  promo- 
tion and  making  of  coal  sales;  advertising;  salesmen’s  sal- 
aries as  are  dedicated  to  the  selling  department;  books;  sta- 
tionery; printing;  postage;  telephone  and  telegraph;  office 
rent ; billing  and  collecting  of  coal  customers’  accounts. 

Close  out  by  charging  to  the  Operating  Account  of  each  mine 
its  proper  proportion,  usually  based  on  tonnage  derived  from 
each  mine. 

Material  and  Supplies. — Vouchers  covering  purchases  of 
material  and  supplies  immediately  used  may  be  distributed 
direct  to  the  debit  of  operating  expense,  but  appropriate  Mate- 
rial and  Supplies  Accounts  should  be  kept  of  such  materials 
as  are  carried  in  stock.  For  example,  in  many  localities  the 
purchase  of  props,  cross-bars,  and  caps  depends  upon  the 
season  of  the  year,  and  not  in  accordance  with  current  con- 
sumption, and  in  such  cases  a Mine  Timber  Account  should  be 
opened,  to  which  should  be  charged  the  cost  of  timber,  includ- 
ing freight  and  the  cost  of  unloading  and  handling  at  the 
mine.  As  the  timber  is  taken  below  it  should  be  credited  to 
Timber  Account  and  charged  to  Operating  Expense,  with  the 
expense  of  preparing  and  delivering  to  the  working  face  under 
the  sub-division  Timbering. 


216  PROCEEDINGS  OF  AMERICAN  MINING  CONGRESS 

The  purchase  of  rails,  fastenings,  spikes,  and  ties  for  track- 
laying is  always  in  anticipation  of  future  requirements,  and 
a Track  Material  Account  should  be  opened,  to  which  the  cost 
of  all  such  material  should  be  charged,  and  as  such  material  is 
taken  below  it  should  be  credited  to  Track  Material  Account 
and  charged  to  Operating  Expense  under  the  sub-division 

Track  Laying. 

The  same  may  be  suggested  as  to  mining  machine  repair 
parts,  but  in  operations  where  five  or  more  mining  machines 
are  used,  it  will  be  found  that  there  is  little  variation  in  the 
expense  per  ton  for  machine  supplies  from  month  to  month, 
and  so  far  as  the  general  accounts  are  concerned,  unless  large 
stocks  are  carried,  it  will  be  proper  to  charge  such  supplies 
direct  to  Operating  Expense,  and  adjust  at  the  end  of  the  year 
by  comparison  of  the  inventory  at  the  beginning  and  end  of 
the  year. 

Mine  Operating  Expense — An  account  with  each  mine  to 
which  will  be  charged  all  expenses  for  labor  and  material  used 
in  and  about  the  mine,  classified  in  accordance  with  the  differ- 
ent accounts  of  work  done,  as  recommended. 

Close  out  by  charging  to  Operating  Account  of  the  same 
mine. 

Operating  Account — An  account  with  each  mine  to  which 
will  be  credited  the  net  realization  of  coal  at  the  mine;  other 
income  belonging  to  such  property. 

Charge  proportion  of  general  expense ; proportion  of  selling- 
expense;  transfer  of  operating  expense;  royalties;  deprecia- 
tion and  depletion;  general  insurance,  liability  or  compensa- 
tion insurance ; taxes,  excluding  income  and  war  taxes. 

Close  out  by  transferring  to  Income  Account. 

Income  Account — To  be  credited  or  charged  with  balance  of 
Operating  Account  of  each  mine,  results  of  coke  plant ; results 
of  washer  operation;  interest  received  or  accrued;  all  other 
income  received  or  accrued. 

Charge  with  contingent  reserve ; maintenance  reserve ; or 
other  reserves ; income  and  excess  profits  tax ; interest  paid  or 
accrued. 


STANDARD  ACCOUNTING  AND  COST  ANALYSIS 


217 


Close  out  to  Profit  and  Loss  at  end  of  the  year. 

Profit  and  Loss  is  credited  or  charged  at  end  of  year  with 
transfer  of  balance  of  Income  Account,  and  charged  with  divi- 
dends paid.  The  balance  of  this  account  to  rest  as  profits 
applicable  to  dividends,  and  chargeable  with  the  transfer  of 
such  amount  as  it  is  desired  to  transfer  to  permanent  surplus. 

Conclusion 

In  submitting  the  foregoing  suggestions  as  to  a standard 
system  of  accounting  and  analysis  of  cost  of  production,  we 
fully  appreciate  that  many  operators  have  highly  developed 
systems  with  which  they  are  fully  justified  in  being  well  satis- 
fied, but  we  are  sure  that  the  advantages  of  uniformity  of 
practice  will  appeal  to  them. 

The  many  whose  accounting  methods  leave  much  to  be 
desired  will  derive  the  most  benefit  from  adopting  a proper 
system.  They  will  know  better  how  they  stand,  what  they 
must  have  to  cover  their  requirements,  and  proper  accounting 
will  help  them  to  exercise  the  tenacity  and  perseverance  requi- 
site for  the  salvation  of  their  capital  and  to  win  a proper 
return  thereon. 

An  accounting  system  will  not  run  itself,  nor  in  itself  reduce 
costs,  nor  increase  efficiency;  this  is  up  to  the  operator  him- 
self ; he  must  study  and  compare,  vitalize  the  figures,  and  act 
on  the  facts  they  illuminate. 


t 


210 


INDEX 


ADDRESSES 

American  Mining  Congress  and  Standardization  IS 

Mine.  Accounting — L.  R.  Diffenderfer  186 

Mine  Drainage — G.  R.  Wood  57 

National  and  International  Standardization — P.  G.  Agnew  166 

Relation  of  Standardization  to  Mine  Management — C.  A.  Mitke 155 

Standardization  and  Efficiency — Warren  R.  Roberts  21 

Standardization  Committee.  Joint  Meeting  11 

Standardization  of  Cars — James  Milliken  47 

Standardization  of  Drilling  Machines  and  Drill-Steel — Arthur  Notman  112 

Standardization  of  Metal-Mining  Accounting — T.  O.  McGrath  189 

✓ 

Standardization  of  Underground  Power  Transmission  and  Equipment 

— A.  B.  Kiser  and  K.  A.  Pauly  71 

Standardization  of  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Standards — G.  K.  Burgess  177 

-Standardization  Work  of  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines — F.  G.  Cottrell  165 

Standard  System  of  Accounting  and  Analysis  of  Cost  of  Production 

— T.  T.  Brewster  201 

Suggestions  for  Standardization  of  Hammer-Drills  and  Accessories 

— G.  H.  Gilman  104 

Ventilation — W.  J.  Montgomery  53 

Agnew,  P.  G. — National  and  International  Standardization  168 

Tentative  Agreement  between  Standardization  Committees  18 


220 


SPEAKERS 

Bayles,  L.  C. — Drilling  Machines  2(50' 

Braly,  Norman, — Drilling  Machines  <51 

Brewster,  T.  T. — Standard  System  of  Accounting  and  Analysis  of  Cost 

of  Production  201 

Burgess,  G.  K. — Standardization  of  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Standards 177 

Cottrell,  F.  G. — Standardization  Work  of  U.  S.  Bureau  of  Mines  ....  165 

Diffenderfer,  L.  R. — Mine  Accounting  186 

Gilman,  G.  II. — Suggestions  for  Standardization  of  Hammer-Drills 

and  Accessories  104 

Kiser,  A.B.,  and  Pauly,  K.A. — Joint  Report  of  Sub-Committees  on  Stand- 
ardization of  Underground  Power  Transmission  and  Equipment. . 71 

McGrath,  T.  O. — Standardization  of  Metal-Mining  Accounting  ......  189 

Milliken,  James, — Standardization  of  Cars  47 

Mitke,  C.  A. — Chairman  of  Joint  Standardization  Committee  11 

Relation  of  Standardization  to  Mine  Management  155 

Notman,  Arthur. — Preliminary  Investigations  in  the  Standardization 

of  Drilling  Machines  and  Drill-Steel  112 

Pauly,  Iv.  A.,  and  Kiser,  A.  B. — Joint  Report  of  Sub-Committees  on 
Standardization  of  Underground  Power  Transmission  and  Equip- 
ment   71 

Roberts,  Warren.  R. — Brief  of  Discussion  of  Joint  Report  of  Sub-Com- 
mittees on  Standardization  of  Underground  Power  Transmission 

and  Equipment  102 

Report  of  Coal  Mining  Branch  30 

Report  of  General  Correlation  Committee  15 

Standardization  and  Efficiency  21 

Scholz,  Carl — Chairman  of  Joint  Standardization  Meeting  11 

Wood,  G.  R. — Mine  Drainage  57 


) 


-•w  ; 


